Literature DB >> 28762665

External validation of the DASH prediction rule: a retrospective cohort study.

A Tosetto1, S Testa2, I Martinelli3, D Poli4, B Cosmi5, C Lodigiani6, W Ageno7, V De Stefano8, A Falanga9, I Nichele1, O Paoletti2, P Bucciarelli3, E Antonucci10, C Legnani5, E Banfi6, F Dentali7, F Bartolomei8, L Barcella9, G Palareti10.   

Abstract

Essentials Predicting recurrences may guide therapy after unprovoked venous thromboembolism (VTE). We evaluated the DASH score in 827 patients with unprovoked VTE to verify prediction accuracy. A DASH score ≤ 1 had a cumulative recurrence risk at 1 year of 3.6%, as predicted by the model. The DASH score performed better in younger (< 65 years old) subjects.
SUMMARY: Background The DASH prediction model has been proposed as a guide to identify patients at low risk of recurrence of venous thromboembolism (VTE), but has never been validated in an independent cohort. Aims To validate the calibration and discrimination of the DASH prediction model, and to evaluate the DASH score in a predefined patient subgroup aged > 65 years. Methods Patients with a proximal unprovoked deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE) who received a full course of vitamin K antagonist or direct oral anticoagulant (> 3 months) and had D-dimer measured after treatment withdrawal were eligible. The DASH score was computed on the basis of the D-dimer level after therapy withdrawal and personal characteristics at the time of the event. Recurrent VTE events were symptomatic proximal or distal DVT/PE, and were analyzed with a time-dependent analysis. Observed 12-month and 24-month recurrence rates were compared with recurrence rates predicted by the DASH model. Results We analyzed a total of 827 patients, of whom 100 (12.1%) had an objectively documented recurrence. As compared with the original DASH cohort, there was a greater proportion of subjects with a 'low-risk' (≤ 1) DASH score (66.3% versus 51.6%, P < 0.001). The slope of the observed versus expected cumulative incidence at 2 years was 0.71 (95% confidence interval 0.51-1.45). The c-statistic was lower for subjects aged > 65 years (0.54) than for younger subjects (0.72). Conclusions These results confirm the validity of DASH prediction model, particularly in young subjects. The recurrence risk in elderly patients (> 65 years) was, however, > 5% even in those with the lowest DASH scores.
© 2017 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.

Entities:  

Keywords:  D-dimer; prediction models; recurrence; risk; venous thromboembolism

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28762665     DOI: 10.1111/jth.13781

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


  12 in total

1.  D-dimer testing to assess the individual risk of venous thromboembolic recurrence in non-elderly patients of both genders: follow the rules!

Authors:  Alessia Abenante; Francesca Zuretti; Cristina Dedionigi; Flavio Tangianu; Francesco Dentali
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2019-12-07       Impact factor: 3.397

2.  Overall haemostatic potential (OHP) assay can risk stratify for venous thromboembolism recurrence in anticoagulated patients.

Authors:  Julie Wang; Hui Yin Lim; Rowena Brook; Jeffrey Lai; Harshal Nandurkar; Prahlad Ho
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2022-07-31       Impact factor: 5.221

3.  Epidemiology and 3-year outcomes of combined oral contraceptive-associated distal deep vein thrombosis.

Authors:  Jean-Philippe Galanaud; Marie-Antoinette Sevestre; Gilles Pernod; Céline Genty; Cécile Richaud; Carole Rolland; Laurence Weber; Susan R Kahn; Isabelle Quéré; Jean-Luc Bosson
Journal:  Res Pract Thromb Haemost       Date:  2020-09-15

4.  Predicting venous thromboembolism in multiple myeloma: development and validation of the IMPEDE VTE score.

Authors:  Kristen M Sanfilippo; Suhong Luo; Tzu-Fei Wang; Mark Fiala; Martin Schoen; Tanya M Wildes; Joseph Mikhael; Nicole M Kuderer; David C Calverley; Jesse Keller; Theodore Thomas; Kenneth R Carson; Brian F Gage
Journal:  Am J Hematol       Date:  2019-08-19       Impact factor: 10.047

Review 5.  A Review of the Role of Non-Vitamin K Oral Anticoagulants in the Acute and Long-Term Treatment of Venous Thromboembolism.

Authors:  Andrew Bromley; Anna Plitt
Journal:  Cardiol Ther       Date:  2018-03-10

Review 6.  Predicting the Risk of Recurrent Venous Thromboembolism: Current Challenges and Future Opportunities.

Authors:  Hannah Stevens; Karlheinz Peter; Huyen Tran; James McFadyen
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2020-05-22       Impact factor: 4.241

7.  Prediction of recurrent venous thrombosis in all patients with a first venous thrombotic event: The Leiden Thrombosis Recurrence Risk Prediction model (L-TRRiP).

Authors:  Jasmijn F Timp; Sigrid K Braekkan; Willem M Lijfering; Astrid van Hylckama Vlieg; John-Bjarne Hansen; Frits R Rosendaal; Saskia le Cessie; Suzanne C Cannegieter
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2019-10-11       Impact factor: 11.069

Review 8.  From Classical Laboratory Parameters to Novel Biomarkers for the Diagnosis of Venous Thrombosis.

Authors:  Larisa Anghel; Radu Sascău; Rodica Radu; Cristian Stătescu
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2020-03-11       Impact factor: 5.923

9.  D-dimer testing, with gender-specific cutoff levels, is of value to assess the individual risk of venous thromboembolic recurrence in non-elderly patients of both genders: a post hoc analysis of the DULCIS study.

Authors:  Gualtiero Palareti; Cristina Legnani; Emilia Antonucci; Benilde Cosmi; Daniela Poli; Sophie Testa; Alberto Tosetto; Walter Ageno; Anna Falanga; Piera Maria Ferrini; Vittorio Pengo; Paolo Prandoni
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2019-11-05       Impact factor: 3.397

10.  Risk prediction of recurrent venous thrombosis; where are we now and what can we add?

Authors:  Jasmijn F Timp; Willem M Lijfering; Frits R Rosendaal; Saskia le Cessie; Suzanne C Cannegieter
Journal:  J Thromb Haemost       Date:  2019-07-04       Impact factor: 5.824

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.