SynthesisEuropean heart journal2026
Predictors of recurrent venous thromboembolism and bleeding in patients with cancer: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in European heart journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinically Relevant Bleeding in Individuals With Cancer: Insights From a Nationwide Cohort Study.American journal of hematology · 2026Article
- Personalized Anticoagulation in Cancer Patients: Current Evidence and Future Perspectives.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Review
- Mechanobiology of cancer-associated thrombosis: from molecular mechanisms to therapeutic innovation.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2026Review
- The year in cardiovascular medicine 2025: the top 10 papers in cardio-oncology.European heart journal · 2026Article
- Incidence and risk factors for catheter-related thrombosis in elderly patients with malignant tumors: a single-center retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsPatients with cancer and venous thromboembolism (VTE) have a high risk of recurrent VTE and anticoagulant-related bleeding. This study aimed to identify prognostic factors for these complications.
methodsA systematic review was performed for randomized trials and cohort studies evaluating prognostic factors for recurrent VTE or anticoagulant-related bleeding in adult patients with cancer and VTE. Adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) for factors were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach.
resultsThirty-three studies (n = 96 753) were included in the meta-analyses. Factors with high certainty of association with increased risk of recurrent VTE included a previous history of VTE [aHR 1.50 (95% CI 1.08-2.09)], Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status >0 [1.81 (1.34-2.46)] or >1 [2.44 (1.55-3.84)], advanced cancer [1.38 (1.15-1.65)], and specific cancer sites including lung [1.78 (1.29-2.46)], hepatobiliary [2.37 (1.70-3.30)], pancreas [3.20 (2.06-4.96)], and genitourinary [1.38 (1.14-1.67)]. Conversely, recent surgery [aHR 0.56 (95% CI 0.40-0.76)] and breast cancer [0.43 (0.23-0.81)] had a high certainty of association with a decreased risk. Factors with a high certainty of association with an increased risk of anticoagulant-related bleeding included a history of bleeding [aHR 2.41 (95% CI 1.50-3.88)], ECOG performance status ≥2 [2.10 (1.48-2.99)], advanced cancer [1.60 (1.29-1.97)], and cancers of the brain [2.25 (1.64-3.09)], gastrointestinal system [1.74 (1.44-2.11)], genitourinary system [1.90 (1.48-2.45)], and prostate [1.72 (1.26-2.34)].
conclusionsThe prognostic factors identified in this meta-analysis should be considered as part of risk stratification frameworks for anticoagulation management in patients with cancer and VTE.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.