MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4389220244 · doi:10.1182/blood-2023-180737

Venous Thromboembolism in Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

2023· article· en· W4389220244 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jodi Chiu, Brianna Ananthan, Matthew Lawrence, Mohamed Aly, Madeleine Weichel, Uday Deotare, Anargyros Xenocostas, Alejandro Lazo‐Langner

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHematopoietic stem cell transplantationSurgeryTransplantationRetrospective cohort studyIncidence (geometry)ThrombosisInternal medicineAdverse effectVenous thrombosisCohort

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is an underappreciated complication seen amongst allogeneic and autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) patients and a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Despite these challenges, VTE in HSCT remains understudied, with a paucity of established guidelines on thrombosis surveillance, prevention, and treatment. Balancing risk of bleeding and thrombosis is particularly challenging as HSCT patients are concurrently pancytopenic and coagulopathic. We aimed to describe the incidence, predictors, and adverse events of VTE amongst patients at 90 days post-HSCT. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adult patients, age >18-years-old, who underwent HSCT for a hematological malignancy between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2021 at a tertiary care centre in Canada. Patients were followed from transplant until Day 90 post-transplant, or death. Baseline, transplant, laboratory, and cancer characteristics were analyzed. Results: Four Hundred and Seventy Six (476) HSCT patients were included (age range 18 - 74), 285 (59.9%) of our patients were male, and 191 (40.1%) were female. Three Hundred and Seventeen (317) (66.6%) patients underwent autologous transplant, and 159 (33.4%) patients underwent allogeneic transplant ( Table 1). Forty Seven (47) patients (9.8%) suffered from VTE within 90 days post-HSCT; 74.5% were catheter related. 9.43% of allogeneic, versus 10.09% autologous patients were diagnosed with VTE (p=0.820). 11.9% of allogeneic, versus 4.1% of autologous patients (p=0.001) suffered from bleed unrelated to anticoagulation. There was significant association of VTE post-HSCT with history of unprovoked DVT (p = 0.026), previous treatment with steroids (p = 0.032), infectious complications (including bacteremia (p = 0.025), and skin and soft tissue infection (p < 0.001)), use of peripherally-inserted central catheters (PICCs (p <0.001), left-sided CVC placement (p = 0.007), second central venous line insertion (due to complications from the first) (p < 0.001), and blocked or malfunctioning central venous catheter (p = 0.003). There was no significant association of VTE post-HSCT with transplant graft (autologous versus allogeneic), underlying hematological malignancy, age, BMI, or sex. Mortality rate at 90 days amongst VTE patients was 14.89%, versus 3.27% in non-VTE patients (p < 0.001) ( Figure 1). Conclusion: The majority of VTE post-HSCT were catheter-related and were more frequently associated with use of PICCs. VTE post-HSCT was associated with higher mortality. VTE prophylaxis or active surveillance could be considered in patients with the above-mentioned risk factors balancing the risk of bleeding, particularly in allogeneic stem cell transplant patients, and those who are concurrently thrombocytopenic.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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