Literature DB >> 25740182

VTE risk assessment in cancer. Who needs prophylaxis and who does not?

C Ay1, I Pabinger.   

Abstract

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with cancer is associated with an increased morbidity and mortality, and its prevention is of major clinical importance. However, the VTE rates in the cancer population vary between 0.5% - 20%, depending on cancer-, treatment- and patient-related factors. The most important contributors to VTE risk are the tumor entity, stage and certain anti-cancer treatments. Cancer surgery represents a strong risk factor for VTE, and medical oncology patients are at increased risk of developing VTE, especially when receiving chemotherapy or immunomodulatory drugs. Also biomarkers have been investigated for their usefulness to predict risk of VTE (e.g. elevated leukocyte and platelet counts, soluble P-selectin, D-dimer, etc.). In order to identify cancer patients at high risk of VTE and to improve risk stratification, risk assessment models have been developed, which contain both clinical parameters and biomarkers. While primary thromboprophylaxis with low-molecular-weight-heparin (LMWH) is recommended postoperatively for a period of up to 4 weeks after major cancer surgery, the evidence is less clear for medical oncology patients. Thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized medical oncology patients is advocated, and is based on results of randomized controlled trials which evaluated the efficacy and safety of LMWH for prevention of VTE in hospitalized medically ill patients. In recent trials the benefit of primary thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy in the ambulatory setting has been investigated. However, at the present stage primary thromboprophylaxis for prevention of VTE in these patients is still a matter of debate and cannot be recommended for all cancer outpatients.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Venous thromboembolism; cancer; hypercoagulability; risk factors; thromboprophylaxis

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25740182     DOI: 10.5482/HAMO-14-11-0066

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hamostaseologie        ISSN: 0720-9355            Impact factor:   1.778


  5 in total

1.  A clinical prediction model for cancer-associated venous thromboembolism: a development and validation study in two independent prospective cohorts.

Authors:  Ingrid Pabinger; Nick van Es; Georg Heinze; Florian Posch; Julia Riedl; Eva-Maria Reitter; Marcello Di Nisio; Gabriela Cesarman-Maus; Noémie Kraaijpoel; Christoph Carl Zielinski; Harry Roger Büller; Cihan Ay
Journal:  Lancet Haematol       Date:  2018-06-07       Impact factor: 18.959

2.  Coagulation profile in patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy: A randomized, controlled trial.

Authors:  Thomas Decker Christensen; Henrik Vad; Søren Pedersen; Kåre Hornbech; Nora Elisabeth Zois; Peter B Licht; Mads Nybo; Anne-Mette Hvas
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-02-15       Impact factor: 3.240

3.  Single-Drug Approach with Edoxaban is Effective for Resolving Non-Acute Cancer-Associated Venous Thrombosis: A Single-Arm Retrospective Analysis.

Authors:  Hirokazu Toshima; Atsushi Hisamatsu; Kouji Kobayashi; Hiroo Ishida; Ken Shimada
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2020-06-28       Impact factor: 6.639

4.  Plasma D-Dimer Level Correlates with Age, Metastasis, Recurrence, Tumor-Node-Metastasis Classification (TNM), and Treatment of Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) Patients.

Authors:  Jiqiang Guo; Ying Gao; Zhihua Gong; Pengfei Dong; Yajie Mao; Fang Li; Jianrong Rong; Junping Zhang; Yongnian Zhou; Huijing Feng; Hongxia Guo; Linxia Gu; Meiwen An; Kaixue Wen; Jin Zhang
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2021-10-19       Impact factor: 3.411

Review 5.  Artificial Intelligence Evidence-Based Current Status and Potential for Lower Limb Vascular Management.

Authors:  Xenia Butova; Sergey Shayakhmetov; Maxim Fedin; Igor Zolotukhin; Sergio Gianesini
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2021-12-02
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.