Performance Status, Cancer-Associated Thrombosis, and Bleeding: A Post-Hoc Analysis of the Avert Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG-PS) is a reliable prognostic determinant for cancer-related outcomes, and a widely used tool to guide cancer management. However, the association between ECOG-PS and clinical outcomes in the setting of cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis is unexplored to date. Methods: To evaluate this association, we leveraged data from the AVERT trial: a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial assessing the efficacy and safety of apixaban 2.5 mg twice daily for primary VTE prevention in intermediate-to-high risk ambulatory cancer patients (Khorana score ≥2) initiating chemotherapy. The primary efficacy outcome was VTE, comprising deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, occurring from randomization through end of follow-up (month 7). The primary safety outcome was clinically relevant bleeding, comprising major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding (CRNMB), occurring during the treatment period. Secondary outcomes included individual components of the primary outcomes and all-cause mortality. Hazard ratios (HRs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the study outcomes in patients with ECOG-PS score of 0-1 vs ≥2 were estimated using a Cox regression model controlling for age, sex, body mass index (BMI), creatinine clearance (CrCl) and study treatment. Results: Overall, 428 (76.0%) of 563 trial participants had an available baseline ECOG-PS score and were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis: 368 (86.0%) and 60 (14.0%) had an ECOG-PS score of 0-1 and ≥2, respectively. Compared with subjects with ECOG-PS score of 0-1, those with ECOG-PS score ≥2 had significantly lower BMI and CrCl, and older age. The two ECOG-PS groups were balanced with respect to other major baseline characteristics. Overall, VTE occurred in 10% (N=6) and 6.3% (N=23) of subjects with ECOG-PS score ≥2 and 0-1, respectively (HR, 1.63; 95% CI, 0.62-4.33; p = 0.32), with similar findings observed for deep vein thrombosis (HR, 1.63; 95% CI, 0.40-6.67; p = 0.50) and pulmonary embolism (HR, 1.90; 95% CI, 0.74-4.87; p = 0.18). Clinically relevant bleeding occurred in 10% (N=6) and 5.7% (N=21) of subjects with ECOG-PS score ≥2 and 0-1, respectively (HR, 2.43; 95% CI, 2.35-4.33; p < 0.0001). Similarly, the risks for major bleeding (HR, 8.51; 95% CI, 1.16-62.52; p = 0.035), CRNMB (HR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.68-1.80; p < 0.0001), and all-cause mortality (HR, 11.10; 95% CI, 1.52-80.90; p = 0.018) were significantly higher among patients with ECOG-PS score ≥2 vs 0-1. Conclusions: Worse performance status was independently associated with substantially increased risks for bleeding complications and mortality among ambulatory patients with active cancer enrolled in the AVERT trial. Our findings identify ECOG-PS as a multidimensional and clinically relevant factor that might be considered for the development of more efficient risk stratification models in the field of cancer-associated VTE. If adequately validated, ECOG-PS may potentially serve as a novel convenient tool aiding clinical decision making in subjects with or at risk for cancer-associated VTE.
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 | 0.013 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".