ArticleFrontiers in oncology2025
Current practices and challenges in the management of cancer-associated thrombosis: a survey of Italian oncologists.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Best evidence summary on anticoagulant management in patients with cancer-associated venous thromboembolism.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study investigates current practices and challenges in managing cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) among Italian oncologists, with the objective of evaluating adherence to guidelines for primary thromboprophylaxis, treatment approaches, and safety considerations. Additionally, it aims to identify areas for potential improvement in clinical decision-making and standardization of CAT management. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted between February and June 2024 among Italian oncologists, facilitated by the Italian Network for Supportive Care in Oncology (NICSO). The online survey comprised 16 multiple-choice questions that addressed primary thromboprophylaxis practices, thrombosis treatment, and anticoagulation safety concerns. Results: A total of 75 oncologists, evenly distributed across the Italian territory, participated in the survey. Among them, 48% consistently administered primary thromboprophylaxis, with a higher prevalence observed in cases of pancreatic (64%) and lung cancers (12%). Overall, 61% utilized risk assessment models (RAMs), mainly the Khorana score. Drug preference varied, with 89% favoring low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) for thromboprophylaxis. For established thrombosis, 72% preferred LMWH, administering treatment to 52% of patients for 3 to 6 months. Awareness of drug-drug interactions was high (93%), and 83% expressed concerns about bleeding risks, with renal impairment identified as a significant comorbidity. Conclusion: The survey highlights variability in CAT management, with limited use of RAMs and personalized treatment plans. These findings underscore the need for enhanced clinician education and standardized guidelines to optimize CAT management, including strategies to address bleeding risk and improve the safety of anticoagulation therapy.
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.