Hypercoagulability and Risk of Venous Thromboembolic Events in Endogenous Cushing's Syndrome: A Systematic Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Hypercortisolism has been implicated in the development of venous thromboembolic events (VTE). We aimed to characterize VTE risk in endogenous Cushing’s syndrome (CS) patients, compare that risk to other pathologies, and determine if there are any associated coagulation factor changes. Methods: Medline and Scopus search for “hypercortisolism” and “thromboembolic disease” from January 1980 - April 2017 to include studies that reported VTE rates and/or coagulation profile of CS patients. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed. Results: Forty-eight studies met inclusion criteria. There were 7,142 CS patients, average age was 42 years and 77.7% female. Odds ratio of spontaneous VTE in CS is 17.82 (95%CI 15.24-20.85, p < 0.00001) when comparing to a healthy population. For CS patients undergoing surgery, the odds ratio (both with / without anticoagulation) of spontaneous VTE is 0.26 (95%CI 0.07-0.11, p < 0.00001) / 0.34 (0.19-0.36, p < 0.00001) when compared to patients undergoing hip fracture surgery who were not treated with anticoagulants. Coagulation profiles in patients with CS showed statistically significant differences compared to controls, as reflected by increases in von Willebrand factor (180.11 vs 112.53 IU/dL, p < 0.01), as well as decreases in activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT; 26.91 vs 30.65, p < 0.001) and factor VIII (169 vs 137 IU/dL, p < 0.05). Conclusion: CS is associated with significantly increased VTE odds versus general population, but lower than in patients undergoing major orthopedic surgery. Although exact timing, type, and dose of anticoagulation medication remains to be established, clinicians might consider monitoring vWF, PTT, and factor VIII when evaluating CS patients and balance advantages of thromboprophylaxis with risk of bleeding.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.031 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".