Key result
Cancer-associated PE shows no difference in severe hemodynamic presentation compared to non-cancer PE.
Why the study?
Routine oncological imaging has increased detection of incidental PE, potentially modifying the contemporary clinical presentation of cancer-associated pulmonary embolism.
Does active cancer increase the risk of severe hemodynamic presentation and adverse early in-hospital outcomes in patients with acute pulmonary embolism?
Cohort (n=381)
No
Does active cancer increase the risk of severe hemodynamic presentation and adverse early in-hospital outcomes in patients with acute pulmonary embolism?
In patients with acute pulmonary embolism, active cancer is associated with higher clinical risk scores and more incidental detections, but not with increased acute hemodynamic severity or worse in-hospital outcomes compared to non-cancer patients.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Similar hemodynamic severity in cancer-associated PE despite higher scores; leaves open whether cancer modifies PE risk stratification or outcomes.
Background: The increasing use of routine oncological imaging has led to more frequent detection of incidental pulmonary embolism (PE), potentially modifying the contemporary clinical presentation of cancer-associated pulmonary embolism (CAPE). Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study including 381 consecutive patients hospitalized with acute PE, of whom 58 had active cancer and 323 had no active malignancy. The primary endpoint was a Severe Hemodynamic Presentation Composite Endpoint (SHPCE), defined as shock, systolic blood pressure < 90 mmHg, and/or high-risk PE according to European Society of Cardiology criteria. Clinical characteristics, severity markers, management strategies, and in-hospital outcomes were compared between patients with CAPE and non-cancer PE (NCPE). Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate factors associated with SHPCE and incidental PE. Results: The patients with CAPE had higher PESI (129.8 ± 29.3 vs. 110.1 ± 32.3; p < 0.001) and sPESI scores (3.03 ± 0.56 vs. 2.68 ± 0.81; p < 0.001), and lower hemoglobin levels (11.7 ± 1.9 vs. 13.2 ± 1.8 g/dL; p < 0.001). Incidental PE was more frequent in CAPE than NCPE cases (13.8% vs. 1.9%; OR 8.45, 95% CI 2.81–25.39; p < 0.001). Despite their higher baseline risk scores, patients with CAPE and NCPE showed similar rates of SHPCE (12.1% vs. 17.6%; p = 0.295), ICU admission (10.3% vs. 11.5%; p = 1.000), and in-hospital mortality (10.3% vs. 11.1%; p = 0.858). In multivariable analyses, right ventricular dysfunction (RVD) showed the strongest association with SHPCE (adjusted OR 10.21, 95% CI 5.34–19.52; p < 0.001), whereas active cancer was not associated with severe presentation. Conclusions: Active cancer was associated with higher clinical risk scores and a greater prevalence of incidental PE but not with increased hemodynamic severity or adverse in-hospital outcomes. Acute PE severity appeared to be more closely related to right ventricular involvement than to cancer status, supporting a severity-based rather than cancer-based approach to risk assessment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pop et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Acute pulmonary embolism (n=381). Active cancer (Cancer-associated pulmonary embolism) vs. No active malignancy (Non-cancer pulmonary embolism) was evaluated on Severe Hemodynamic Presentation Composite Endpoint (SHPCE), defined as shock, systolic blood pressure < 90 mmHg, and/or high-risk PE (p=0.295). Patients with cancer-associated pulmonary embolism had similar rates of severe hemodynamic presentation compared to those with non-cancer pulmonary embolism (12.1% vs. 17.6%, p=0.295), despite higher baseline clinical risk scores.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: