MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7118254483 · doi:10.3138/cim-2025-0195

Development and validation of a deep vein thrombosis risk nomogram for post-operative complications in prostate cancer patients

2025· article· en· W7118254483 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dingqin Zheng

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical and investigative medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNomogramDeep veinProstate cancerThrombosisRisk assessmentClinical Practice

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Post-operative deep vein thrombosis (DVT) significantly compromises outcomes in prostate cancer (PCa) surgery patients. This study aimed to develop and validate a clinically applicable nomogram for individualized DVT risk stratification. METHODS: In this retrospective matched case-control study, 500 PCa patients (150 DVT, 350 non-DVT) undergoing surgery (2018-2023) were analyzed after rigorous DVT confirmation via duplex ultrasonography (92.2% adherence) and radiologist adjudication (κ = 0.86). To address the inflated DVT incidence due to case-control sampling, inverse probability weighting corrected sampling bias (weighted DVT incidence 12.3% versus true 12.1%), with post-weighting covariate balance confirmed by a standardized mean difference <0.08. Independent predictors were identified through multivariate logistic regression, with nomogram construction and validation (bootstrap optimism correction; temporal validation cohort n = 103). Decision curve analysis (DCA) evaluated clinical utility by quantifying net benefit across threshold probabilities (5%-80%). RESULTS: Age (OR 1.045 [95% CI 1.022-1.072] per year), surgery duration (OR 1.018/10 [95% CI 1.011-1.025 per min), preoperative D-dimer (OR 1.315 [95% CI 1.192-1.451] for every 0.1 mg/L), prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD; OR 4.805 [95% CI 2.761-8.365] per unit), and advanced tumour stage (T3-T4, OR 3.512 [95% CI 2.012-6.115]) were significant predictors. The nomogram demonstrated excellent discrimination (optimism-corrected area under the curve [AUC] = 0.942; temporal validation AUC=0.918) and calibration (slope = 0.94). Clinical thresholds: age ≥68.3 years, surgery ≥159.7 min, D-dimer ≥0.92 mg/L, PSAD ≥2.95 ng/mL/cm³. DCA revealed optimal clinical utility at 10%-60% risk thresholds, with a maximum net benefit (0.111) at 10% threshold probability, consistently outperforming default treatment strategies. CONCLUSIONS: This validated nomogram integrates five readily available clinical variables to precisely quantify DVT risk in PCa surgical patients. It enables personalized preoperative risk assessment, facilitating targeted prophylaxis to mitigate thromboembolic complications beyond guideline-compliant prevention.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.295 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical and investigative medicine→Same topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management→French-language works237,207→