Key result
Only 1 available risk model specifically targets anticoagulant-associated bleeding in cancer-associated thrombosis.
Why the study?
Tailoring anticoagulation for cancer-associated thrombosis requires assessing bleeding risk, but the applicability of available bleeding risk assessment models in this population was unclear.
Are currently available risk assessment models for anticoagulant-associated bleeding applicable and validated in patients with cancer-associated thrombosis?
Population
15 risk assessment models for anticoagulant-associated bleeding in patients with VTE
Design
Systematic review
Authors
Loading...
Existing bleeding risk models lack validation in cancer-associated thrombosis; leaves open urgent need for dedicated, prospectively tested CAT-specific tools.
Systematic Review
Are currently available risk assessment models for anticoagulant-associated bleeding applicable and validated in patients with cancer-associated thrombosis?
There is a critical lack of validated risk assessment models for anticoagulant-associated bleeding specifically designed or validated for patients with cancer-associated thrombosis.
Poénou et al. (2022) conducted a systematic review in Cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT). Risk assessment models (RAMs) was evaluated. Risk assessment models for anticoagulant-associated bleeding in cancer-associated thrombosis are limited, as only 1 of 15 models (CAT-BLEED) was developed specifically for this patient population.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: