Benefit of prophylactic anticoagulation before and during first-line chemotherapy on patients with metastatic germ cell tumors.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
402 Background: Recent trials randomising patients (pts) receiving systemic cancer therapy showed that prophylactic anticoagulation (PAK) halves the risk of venous thromboembolic events (VTE) and doubles the risk of bleeding (Khorana et al. & Carrier et al., both NEJM 2019). In pts with metastatic germ cell tumors (mGCT) VTE is a frequent complication but it remains unclear whether PAK should be recommended because the number of mGCT pts in those trials was small. We aimed to determine the risk of VTE before, during and after chemotherapy and in mGCT pts without and with risk factors for VTE (retroperitoneal lymph nodes, Khorana score, venous access device) and to calculate the number needed to treat (NNT) and number needed to harm (NNH) of PAK. Methods: This retrospective analysis included mGCT pts treated with first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. We excluded patients who received PAK, with a known history of coagulopathy or VTE and extracted data about VTE and bleeding events. Cumulative VTE incidence was calculate for patients without and with increasing number of known risk factors for VTEs. NNT and NNH were calculated by assuming similar hazard ratios (HR) to reduce VTEs and increase bleeding as previously published (HR 0.66 and 1.96, Khorana et al., NEJM 2019). Results: Out of 1039 pts, 132 (13%) presented with VTE, 6 (1%) with bleeding. One patients died of VTE and 1 because of bleeding. Patients without any VTE risk factors experience VTE in 20/347 (5%) which translated into a NNT of 55 compared to the NNH of 84 respectively. Before start of chemotherapy 52 (5%) pts (NNT=60) presented with VTE of which 22 were reported symptomatic 21 asymptomatic/incidentally detected VTE on staging scans (9 unknowns). During chemotherapy 79 (8%) pts (NNT=40) were diagnosed with VTE whereas 19 (2%) pts (NNT=162) were diagnosed with VTE after chemotherapy. Conclusions: Our analysis revealed that even mGCT patients without risk factors for VTE show a relevant cumulative VTE incidence of 7%. Especially before and during but not after chemotherapy the benefits of PAK to prevent VTE outweighs the small increased 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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".