MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Evaluating the Need for Anticoagulation Beyond 6 Months for Patients with Cancer-Associated Venous Thromboembolism: A Retrospect of Real Life (EXTEND Study)

2014· article· en· W2737230095 on OpenAlexaffabout
Martha Louzada, Michael J. Kovacs, Fatimah Al‐Ani, Lenicio Siqueira, Alejandro Lazo‐Langner

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCancerRetrospective cohort studyThrombosisLow molecular weight heparinMalignancySurgeryClinical trialVenous thrombosisInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: The association between cancer and venous thromboembolism (VTE) has been well documented. In patients with cancer, the risk for a first cancer- associated thrombosis is 5 to 28-fold higher than in non-cancer patients. Current oncology clinical practice guidelines recommend that patients with cancer- associated thrombosis be treated for a minimum of 6 months with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) provided they do not have any contraindications to anticoagulant therapy. The length of anticoagulation beyond the initial 6 months is controversial due to the absence of clinical trials data. Panel consensus from the ASCO 2013 clinical practice guidelines recommends continuing anticoagulation if malignancy remains active or patient is still on active anticancer treatment. There is clear equipoise in which type of anticoagulation approach, if any, is the best beyond 6 months of anticoagulation for these patients. In this retrospective analysis we sought to evaluate what has been the extended anticoagulation therapy of choice in our thrombosis clinic over the past 5 years and its efficacy in preventing late recurrent venous thromboembolism. Methods: We conducted a single- centre retrospective cohort study (London, Canada) to collect data from adult patients with cancer -associated VTE who received anticoagulation with therapeutic LMWH for at least 6 months. We collected data from January 2008 to December 2013. We included patients 18 years old or older; with any type of active cancer (except basal cell and squamous cell carcinoma of the skin) or stage. Follow up period started at 6 months of anticoagulation and finished at 12 months (total of 6 months of study follow-up), or at time of a recurrent VTE, or death or last follow up in clinic, whichever came first. We used SAS 9.2 to perform the data analysis. Results: In total 417 patients were potentially eligible but 149 fulfilled our inclusion criteria. 78 (52%) were males, median age was 65 (range 25-86). 123 (82.4%) patients had solid tumors and 26 (17.6%) hematological malignancy. Of the patients with solid tumors, 98 (80.3%) had stage III or IV disease. The most frequent primary tumor sites were colorectal (n= 36; 34%), lung (n=29;20%) and pancreas (n= 17; 11%) among others (n= 41). After the first 6 months of anticoagulation, 20 (13%) patients were considered to be in complete remission of their cancer. In total, 45 of 149 (31%) patients discontinued anticoagulant therapy. 64 (43%) remained on full weight-adjusted dose LMWH, 10 (6%) on prophylactic dose, 29 (19%) were switched to warfarin and 1 (1%) to rivaroxaban. Of the 45 patients that discontinued anticoagulation, 7 were considered to be in complete remission. Overall, there were 21 (14%) VTE recurrences after the first 6 months of anticoagulation. 12 (57%) occurred in patients using full dose LMWH. Patients in complete remission had a lower risk for VTE recurrence (OR= 0.31; 95%CI: 0.102 - 0.920; p= 0.0349). Although not statistically significant, there is a trend of high VTE recurrence risk in patients with lung or colon cancer, or stage III/IV and for patients on full doseLMWH (Table). A post-hoc power calculation of our study demonstrated 84% power with a 2-sided alpha of 0.05. Conclusion: Our study demonstrated a significant increased risk for recurrent VTE (14%) in after the firs 6 months of anticoagulation in patients with cancer-associated VTE irrespective of anticoagulation approach. Being in complete remission is significantly associated with a low risk for recurrence. Having lung or colon cancer or advanced stage may increase recurrence risk. Interestingly, patients on full LMWH also showed trend to high VTE recurrence risk. This may reflect a sicker subset of patients with an inherent higher VTE risk. Further prospective trials are warranted to better study the best anticoagulation approach for patients with cancer-associated VTE beyond the first 6 months of anticoagulation. Table. Univariate analysis for the association of VTE recurrence and tunor and patients characteristics Variables OR (95%CI)# P -value Female 0.58 (0.2 - 1.7) 0.321 Warfarin 0.97 (0.3 - 3.1) 0.958 Prophylactic LMWH^ 0.75 (0.09 - 6.3) 0.791 Full LMWH^ 1.56 (0.62 - 3.9) 0.348 Colorectal* 1.69 (0.4 - 6.4) 0.443 Lung* 1.76 (0.4 - 7.0) 0.422 Pancreas* 0.90 (0.15 - 5.5) 0.909 stageIII or IV 1.93 (0.67 - 5.5) 0.223 #odds ratio ( 95% confidence interval) ^ reference: no anticoagulation * reference: hematological cancer Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management→French-language works237,207→