Epidemiology, biology, and management of venous thromboembolism in gliomas: An interdisciplinary review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patients with diffuse glioma are at high risk of developing venous thromboembolism (VTE) over the course of the disease, with up to 30% incidence in patients with glioblastoma (GBM) and a lower but nonnegligible risk in lower-grade gliomas. Recent and ongoing efforts to identify clinical and laboratory biomarkers of patients at increased risk offer promise, but to date, there is no proven role for prophylaxis outside of the perioperative period. Emerging data suggest a higher risk of VTE in patients with isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) wild-type glioma and the potential mechanistic role of IDH mutation in the suppression of production of the procoagulants tissue factor and podoplanin. According to published guidelines, therapeutic anticoagulation with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) or alternatively, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in patients without increased risk of gastrointestinal or genitourinary bleeding is recommended for VTE treatment. Due to the elevated risk of intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) in GBM, anticoagulation treatment remains challenging and at times fraught. There are conflicting data on the risk of ICH with LMWH in patients with glioma; small retrospective studies suggest DOACs may convey lower ICH risk than LMWH. Investigational anticoagulants that prevent thrombosis without impairing hemostasis, such as factor XI inhibitors, may carry a better therapeutic index and are expected to enter clinical trials for cancer-associated thrombosis.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".