Scoring systems to predict thrombotic complications in solid tumor patients.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 HEMATOLOGY Current Opinion in Hematology Pub Date : 2025-02-07 DOI:10.1097/MOH.0000000000000862
Swati Sharma, Sumit Sahni, Silvio Antoniak
{"title":"Scoring systems to predict thrombotic complications in solid tumor patients.","authors":"Swati Sharma, Sumit Sahni, Silvio Antoniak","doi":"10.1097/MOH.0000000000000862","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>To explore the use of large datasets in predicting and managing cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (CAT) by stratifying patients into risk groups. This includes evaluating current predictive models and identifying potential improvements to enhance clinical decision-making.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>Cancer patients are at an elevated risk of developing venous thromboembolism (VTE), which significantly impacts mortality and quality of life. Traditional approaches to risk assessment fail to account for the procoagulant changes associated with cancer, making individualized risk prediction a challenge. Current clinical guidelines as per ASCO recommend risk assessment before chemotherapy and endorse thromboprophylaxis as a standard preventive measure. Since any cancer population is highly heterogeneous in terms of VTE risk, predicting the risk of CAT is an oncological challenge. To address this, different predictive models have been developed to stratify patients by risk, enabling targeted thromboprophylaxis. However, these models vary in accuracy and utility. The present review discusses the pros and cons of these different models.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>The review examines existing CAT risk prediction models, highlighting their strengths, limitations, and diagnostic performance. It also identifies additional variables that could enhance these models to improve their effectiveness in guiding clinicians toward better risk stratification and treatment decisions for cancer patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":55196,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Hematology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Hematology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MOH.0000000000000862","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose of review: To explore the use of large datasets in predicting and managing cancer-associated venous thromboembolism (CAT) by stratifying patients into risk groups. This includes evaluating current predictive models and identifying potential improvements to enhance clinical decision-making.

Recent findings: Cancer patients are at an elevated risk of developing venous thromboembolism (VTE), which significantly impacts mortality and quality of life. Traditional approaches to risk assessment fail to account for the procoagulant changes associated with cancer, making individualized risk prediction a challenge. Current clinical guidelines as per ASCO recommend risk assessment before chemotherapy and endorse thromboprophylaxis as a standard preventive measure. Since any cancer population is highly heterogeneous in terms of VTE risk, predicting the risk of CAT is an oncological challenge. To address this, different predictive models have been developed to stratify patients by risk, enabling targeted thromboprophylaxis. However, these models vary in accuracy and utility. The present review discusses the pros and cons of these different models.

Summary: The review examines existing CAT risk prediction models, highlighting their strengths, limitations, and diagnostic performance. It also identifies additional variables that could enhance these models to improve their effectiveness in guiding clinicians toward better risk stratification and treatment decisions for cancer patients.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
3.10%
发文量
78
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: ​​​​​​​​Current Opinion in Hematology is an easy-to-digest bimonthly journal covering the most interesting and important advances in the field of hematology. Its hand-picked selection of editors ensure the highest quality selection of unbiased review articles on themes from nine key subject areas, including myeloid biology, Vascular biology, hematopoiesis and erythroid system and its diseases.
期刊最新文献
Germline DDX41 mutations in myeloid neoplasms: the current clinical and molecular understanding. Posttransplant cyclophosphamide: a universal graft versus host disease prophylaxis. Unraveling lipid metabolism for acute myeloid leukemia therapy. Models to study myelodysplastic syndrome and acute myeloid leukaemia. Red blood cell changes due to cancer and cancer treatments: a narrative review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1