ArticleFrontiers in oncology2026
Development and validation of a competing risk nomogram for predicting PICC-related venous thrombosis in patients with gastrointestinal malignancies.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Peripherally inserted central catheter-related venous thrombosis (PICC-RVT) is an important complication in patients with gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies. Established catheter-related factors may interact with patient-level hypercoagulability and inflammation, but their combined predictive contribution in patients undergoing interventional therapy remains uncertain. This study aimed to estimate the cumulative incidence of symptomatic PICC-RVT and develop an internally validated prediction model accounting for competing events. Methods: This single-center retrospective cohort included 782 patients with GI malignancies who underwent PICC placement. The primary outcome was symptomatic PICC-RVT confirmed by ultrasonography. Death and unplanned catheter removal for non-thrombotic causes were treated as competing events. Seven candidate predictor parameters were prespecified and evaluated using Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard regression, followed by Akaike information criterion-based backward reduction. Model discrimination and calibration were assessed using the C-index and calibration curves. Internal validation was performed with 1,000 bootstrap resamples, repeating the complete model-development procedure. Results: During a median potential follow-up of 72 days, 74 patients developed symptomatic PICC-RVT. The cumulative incidence was 7.8% at 1 month and 9.2% at 3 months. Four predictors were retained in the final model: CVR >0.45, non-cavoatrial junction catheter tip position, higher baseline D-dimer, and NLR ≥3.0. The apparent C-index was 0.76 (95% CI, 0.71-0.81), and the optimism-corrected C-index was 0.75. Calibration was acceptable at 1, 2, and 3 months. Conclusions: The model quantified the combined associations of established catheter-related factors and patient-level coagulation and inflammatory markers with symptomatic PICC-RVT in patients with GI malignancies undergoing interventional therapy. These findings reinforce standardized catheter sizing and tip positioning. External validation and clinical impact assessment are required before the model is considered for clinical implementation.
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.