MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Incidence of Venous Thromboembolism in Acute Leukemia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2017· review· en· W2963593007 on OpenAlexaff
Fatimah Al‐Ani, Azin Ahrari, Yimin Pearl Wang, Alla Iansavitchene, Alejandro Lazo‐Langner

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineAcute promyelocytic leukemiaIncidence (geometry)Hazard ratioAcute leukemiaLeukemiaMyeloid leukemiaObservational studyRandomized controlled trialConfidence intervalGastroenterologyMeta-analysisCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) incidence in hematological cancer patients greatly influences their morbidity and mortality. However, VTE complications in acute leukemia (AL) received little attention in comparison to other more frequently occurring complications, such as thrombocytopenia-associated bleeding and granulocytopenia related severe infection. Methods: We conducted a systematic review to systematically assess the incidence rate of VTE in the setting of AL, including acute myeloid leukemia (AML), acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL), and acute lymphoid leukemia (ALL), using the information from available observational studies and randomized trials. A meta-analysis of proportions using fixed and random effects models was performed. Herein, we report all the outcomes in random model estimates. Results: Thirty studies were included (29 observational and 1 case control) with a total of 15,491 AL participants in (age range: 15-91). Of the total participants, the number of evaluable patients was 10,788 in AML, 3,242 in ALL, and 1,031 in APL. The VTE rate was found to be 8.8% (95%CI: 8.78-8.81) in all AL patients, 8.2% (95%CI: 8.21-8.23) in AML, 9.7% (95%CI: 9.68-9.75) in ALL, and 10.8% (95%CI: 10.79-10.85) in APL. The recurrence rate was 12% (95%CI: 9.03-15.08) in AL patients (n=435); 17% (95%CI: 11.02-24.26) with AML (n=135); 12% (95%CI: 7.61-18.33) with ALL (n=142) (AML vs. ALL: p=0.233). A subgroup analysis of catheter related thrombosis (CRT) demonstrated a rate of 4.95% in all AL participants (95%CI: 4.94-4.96), 4.7% (95%CI: 4.68-4.77) in AML, 4.3% (95%CI: 4.27-4.32) in ALL, and 7% (95%CI: 6.99-7.10) in APL. The rate of cerebral vein thrombosis in ALL patients treated with l-asparaginase was 2.8% (95%CI: 2.78-2.90). Conclusion: Our data demonstrates a significant incidence of venous thrombosis in AL patients, with a high recurrence rate among those patients. L-asparaginase seems to be particularly associated with a considerably high rate of cerebral thrombosis in ALL. However, there was a lack in randomized trials addressing thrombosis incidence in AL as a primary outcome. Given these significant incidence rates of thromboembolism, future studies are warranted to address the efficacy and safety of thromboprophylaxis in AL patients. Download : Download high-res image (187KB) Download : Download full-size image Disclosures Lazo-Langner: Bayer: Honoraria; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Alexion: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0150.028
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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