Literature DB >> 28585779

The impact of initial cancer stage on the incidence of venous thromboembolism: the Scandinavian Thrombosis and Cancer (STAC) Cohort.

I L Gade1, S K Braekkan2,3, I A Naess4, J-B Hansen2,3, S C Cannegieter5, K Overvad6,7, H Jensvoll2,3, J Hammerstrøm8, K Blix2,3, A Tjønneland9, S R Kristensen1,10, M T Severinsen1,11.   

Abstract

Essentials Impact of cancer stage on venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk is not well-known in all cancers. The Scandinavian Thrombosis and Cancer Cohort provides person-time data and validated VTEs. Impact of cancer stage on VTE incidence tended to vary with cancer type. Cancer stage may not per se be a risk factor for VTE in all cancer types.
SUMMARY: Background Absolute measures of the impact of cancer stage on the incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with distinct cancer types have not been investigated in a large population-based cohort study. Objectives To investigate differences in the incidence rates of objectively confirmed VTE according to the development of cancer in a large population-based cohort study. Cancer type and stage at the time of diagnosis were taken into account. Patients and Methods The Scandinavian Thrombosis and Cancer Cohort includes data regarding cancer types, stages and objectively confirmed VTE diagnoses among 144 952 participants followed from 1993 to 2012. We studied stage-specific incidence rates of VTE, and calculated incidence rate differences (IRDs) for VTE according to stages in patients with 10 types of solid cancer. Results During the entire follow-up, 335 VTEs occurred, of which 293 occurred within 5 years. The IRD of VTE in patients with distant metastasis as compared with those with localized disease indicated large variation depending on cancer type. The highest IRD was observed for pancreatic cancer (IRD of 187.0 × 10-3 person-years [p-y]; 95% confidence interval [CI] - 6.7 to 380.8), and the lowest IRD was observed for prostate cancer (IRD of 3.7 × 10-3 p-y; 95% CI - 7 to 15.2). Regional spread as compared with localized disease also indicated large variation depending on cancer type; the highest IRD was observed for uterine cancer (IRD of 37.6 × 10-3 p-y; 95% CI - 23.7 to 99), and the IRDs for breast and prostate cancer were close to zero. Conclusion More advanced cancer at the time of diagnosis was associated with a higher risk of VTE, but the strength of the associations differed substantially between cancer types.
© 2017 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cancer; epidemiology; incidence; metastasis; venous thromboembolism

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28585779     DOI: 10.1111/jth.13752

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Thromb Haemost        ISSN: 1538-7836            Impact factor:   5.824


  13 in total

1.  Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism in Pancreatic Cancer: Breaking Down a Complex Clinical Dilemma.

Authors:  Matthew C Dallos; Andrew B Eisenberger; Susan E Bates
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2019-10-01

2.  Characteristics and Prognostic Factors of Venous Thromboembolism in Cancer Patients.

Authors:  Hajime Tsuyuki; Naoto Yamamoto; Naoki Unno; Kazunori Inuzuka; Masaki Sano; Kazuto Katahashi; Tatsuro Yata; Takafumi Kayama; Yuta Yamanaka; Yusuke Endo; Hiroya Takeuchi
Journal:  Ann Vasc Dis       Date:  2022-06-25

3.  Utility of Viscoelastic Assays Beyond Coagulation: Can Preoperative Thrombelastography Indices Predict Tumor Histology, Nodal Disease, and Resectability in Patients Undergoing Pancreatectomy?

Authors:  Hunter B Moore; Alessandro Paniccia; Peter J Lawson; Robert J Torphy; Trevor L Nydam; Ernest E Moore; Martin D McCarter; Richard D Schulick; Barish H Edil
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2018-03-30       Impact factor: 6.113

4.  Venous Thromboembolism in Patients with Sarcoma: A Retrospective Study.

Authors:  Thierry Alcindor; Ali Al-Fakeeh; Krista Goulding; Susan Solymoss; Nathalie Ste-Marie; Robert Turcotte
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2018-09-26

Review 5.  Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism in Pancreatic Cancer: Breaking Down a Complex Clinical Dilemma.

Authors:  Matthew C Dallos; Andrew B Eisenberger; Susan E Bates
Journal:  Oncologist       Date:  2019-10-01

6.  Can thromboprophylaxis build a link for cancer patients undergoing surgical and/or chemotherapy treatment? The MeTHOS cohort study.

Authors:  Spyridon Xynogalos; David Simeonidis; George Papageorgiou; Abraham Pouliakis; Nikolaos Charalambakis; Evangelos Lianos; Evridiki Mazlimoglou; Alexandros-Nikolaos Liatsos; Christos Kosmas; Nicolaos Ziras
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2022-05-12       Impact factor: 3.359

7.  Venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: report of baseline data from the multicentre, prospective Cancer-VTE Registry.

Authors:  Yasuo Ohashi; Masataka Ikeda; Hideo Kunitoh; Mitsuru Sasako; Takuji Okusaka; Hirofumi Mukai; Keiichi Fujiwara; Mashio Nakamura; Mari S Oba; Tetsuya Kimura; Kei Ibusuki; Masato Sakon
Journal:  Jpn J Clin Oncol       Date:  2020-10-22       Impact factor: 3.019

8.  Tissue Factor-bearing MPs and the risk of venous thrombosis in cancer patients: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Chan-Juan Cui; Guo-Jing Wang; Shuo Yang; Sheng-Kai Huang; Rui Qiao; Wei Cui
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-01-26       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 9.  Cancer-associated thrombosis: The search for the holy grail continues.

Authors:  Betül Ünlü; Henri H Versteeg
Journal:  Res Pract Thromb Haemost       Date:  2018-07-26

10.  Application of Thromboelastography to Predict Lung Cancer Stage.

Authors:  Yaning Zhou; Yijun Guo; Qing Cui; Yun Dong; Xiaoyue Cai; Zhouji Zhang; Xiaoting Wu; Kaiyan Yi; Ming Zhang
Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2020 Jan-Dec
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.