Risk of arterial (ATE) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) in a population-based cohort of bevacizumab-treated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
545 Background: Bevacizumab is associated with both arterial (ATE) and venous thromboembolic (VTE) events, estimated to be </=15% from clinical trials. Our objectives were to 1) characterize the incidence of ATE or VTE among mCRC patients receiving bevacizumab in a non-clinical trial setting; 2) determine patient and treatment-related factors that predispose to an increased risk of ATE or VTE; and 3) explore how thromboembolism is managed and whether bevacizumab is discontinued and/or resumed after an event. Methods: A random sample of mCRC patients diagnosed between 2008 and 2009, referred to 1 of 5 regional cancer centers in British Columbia, and who were offered bevacizumab was reviewed. Summary statistics were used to describe and compare clinical factors between those who experienced an ATE or VTE and those who did not. Results: Of the 200 mCRC patients offered bevacizumab, 10 never received the drug and 12 were lost to follow up. Among the 178 remaining patients, median age was 61 years, 103 (58%) were male, and 121 (85%) had ECOG 0 to 1. A total of 39 patients (28%) experienced at least 1 documented thromboembolic event. Compared to patients who developed a clot, those who did not had similar median age (62 vs 61), gender distribution (23% men and 20% women), ECOG 0 to 1 (84% vs 85%) and body mass index (26.4 vs 25.3). However, the mean number of bevacizumab doses was higher in the group with thromboembolism (12.6 vs 9.0), suggesting a potential dose-related effect. There were a total of 43 VTE and 5 ATE events documented, with 7 of the 39 patients (18%) experiencing more than 1 event. Bevacizumab was held or discontinued in 60% of cases, but it was continued in 25% of the cases; 4% of the events were fatal, and 10% of the VTE/ATE occurred after bevacizumab was stopped. Conclusions: The incidence of ATE and VTE in a non-study setting appears to be higher than that reported in clinical trials. There may be a dose-related effect. Bevacizumab was not consistently held or discontinued in the setting of a VTE or ATE. Development of guidelines for the management of thromboembolism with bevacizumab may be warranted.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".