ReviewJournal of thrombosis and thrombolysis2025
Atrial fibrillation and ischemic stroke in cancer: the latest scientific evidence, current management, and future directions.
Review in Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Addition of malignancy into the CHADS2/CHA2DS2VASc score: better prediction of stroke risk in individuals with cancer and atrial fibrillation.Cardio-oncology (London, England) · 2026Article
- Thrombosis in patients with cancer: challenges and advances.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2025Article
- The B-SCancers · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Atrial fibrillation is the most common cardiac arrhythmia and is a major risk factor for ischemic stroke. Atrial fibrillation and ischemic stroke are major cardiovascular complications in cancer patients, who have a higher burden and worse outcomes than the general population. Clinical risk stratification scores for stroke and bleeding, commonly used in the general population to estimate thromboembolic and bleeding risk, respectively, are less well validated in cancer patients, who have historically been excluded in clinical trials. There is a lack of consensus opinion on how to effectively risk-stratify cancer patients based on the currently available tools and a need for cancer-specific scores that offer a tailored approach to each patient in order to more effectively stratify ischemic stroke and bleeding risk in this cohort of patients. Cancer-mediated physiologic changes and adverse effects of antineoplastic therapy have been implicated as etiologies of the increased risk for both atrial fibrillation and ischemic stroke. Risk stratifying scores such as CHA
Indexed as
Identifiers
40281267What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.