ReviewJournal of thrombosis and thrombolysis2025
Intravenous thrombolysis in the context of stroke and cancer.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Thrombosis in patients with cancer: challenges and advances.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2025Article
- Malignancy-Associated Pulmonary Embolism: Mortality, Recurrence, and Bleeding Risks.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Beyond the coagulopathy phenotype in cancer-associated stroke: routine radiology report-based phenotyping and a practical diagnostic prioritization.Frontiers in neurologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCancer patients are at an increased risk for ischemic and hemorrhagic strokes. Ischemic stroke in this population often presents with distinctive features, such as cryptogenic etiology and multiple ischemic lesions, and is driven by cancer-associated coagulopathy, complicating management strategies.
methodsWe reviewed current literature on intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) for acute ischemic stroke in cancer patients through PubMed search with no time limits. We included international guidelines, meta-analyses, cohort studies, and case series to evaluate its safety and efficacy. This descriptive review aims to evaluate the risks and benefits of thrombolytic treatment in patients with acute stroke and cancer. DISCUSSION: Despite limited high-quality evidence (no randomized trial), studies suggest that IVT is generally safe and effective in cancer patients with ischemic stroke. However, treatment should be individualized, considering specific contraindications and the patient's tumor characteristics. The 2019 American Heart Association/American Stroke Association guidelines contraindicate IVT in patients with gastrointestinal or intra-axial tumors; conversely, these conditions are not explicitly mentioned in the 2021 European Stroke Organization guidelines, as recent studies have not proven them to be at higher risk per se. Particular attention should be given to coagulation abnormalities, recent surgery, and concomitant medications. Thus, cautious and multidisciplinary management is needed. Further research is essential to define risk stratification for this complex population better. Multicentered, well-designed prospective studies are crucial and should also differentiate patients based on tumor site, histology, and molecular characteristics that could impact both thrombotic and hemorrhagic risk.
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.