ArticleAnnals of medicine2026
Association of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents and red blood cell transfusion with venous thrombosis in patients with cancer: a nationwide case-crossover study.
Article in Annals of medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundCancer-associated anemia is commonly managed with erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) and red blood cell (RBC) transfusions; however, their relative thrombotic risks remain uncertain.
methodsWe conducted a nationwide population-based case-crossover study using the Korean National Health Insurance Database. Adult patients with newly diagnosed cancer between 2011 and 2020 who developed incident venous thrombosis were included. Exposure to ESAs and other time-varying risk factors was assessed during a 12-week hazard period preceding thrombosis and compared with a matched 12-week control period, separated by a 24-week washout interval. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs).
resultsAmong 710,910 patients with cancer, several clinical exposures occurred more frequently during the hazard period than during the control period, including RBC transfusion (6.85% vs 1.79%), hospitalization (11.79% vs 2.77%), surgery (5.70% vs 2.00%), and central venous catheter insertion (3.34% vs 0.74%) (all
conclusionsRBC transfusion was associated with an increased risk of venous thrombosis in patients with cancer, whereas ESA therapy was not independently associated with thrombotic complications after adjustment. These findings suggest that RBC transfusion may contribute to thrombotic risk in patients with cancer and highlight the need for careful consideration when managing cancer-associated anaemia.
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.