Key result
Current treatments for cancer-associated thrombosis, including low molecular weight heparin and warfarin, have limitations, leaving optimal prophylaxis and treatment methods uncertain.
Why the study?
What are the optimal methods for the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer?
What are the optimal methods for the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer?
This review summarizes the evidence and highlights the uncertainties and limitations of current prophylactic and therapeutic strategies for cancer-associated thrombosis.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Uncertainties in cancer-associated thrombosis management persist; leaves open optimal prophylaxis and treatment strategies.
Patients with cancer are at high risk to develop venous thromboembolism, and they are also more likely to develop complications from anticoagulant treatment. Because little research has focused on the oncology population to date, the optimal methods of prophylaxis and treatment remain uncertain in some clinical situations. Currently, low molecular weight heparin and warfarin are the most frequently used pharmacologic agents; however, they have their limitations. Other therapeutic options, such as inferior caval filters, are poorly studied and remain controversial. A summary of the most recent evidence on the prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients is presented here.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Brose et al. (2008) conducted a review in Cancer-associated thrombosis. Anticoagulant treatment (low molecular weight heparin, warfarin) was evaluated. Current treatments for cancer-associated thrombosis, including low molecular weight heparin and warfarin, have limitations, leaving optimal prophylaxis and treatment methods uncertain.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: