Why the study?
What are the distinguishing biomarker and imaging characteristics of cancer-associated ischemic stroke compared to stroke without cancer?
What are the distinguishing biomarker and imaging characteristics of cancer-associated ischemic stroke compared to stroke without cancer?
A D-dimer level >2.785 μg/ml and the presence of acute multiple brain infarcts in ≥3 vascular territories are sensitive indicators for identifying cancer-associated ischemic stroke.
May flag occult cancer in stroke patients; hypothesis-generating and requires prospective validation before clinical use.
BACKGROUND: The patterns and mechanisms underlying stroke in cancer patients differ from those of the conventional etiology. In this study, we further investigated the characteristics distinguishing cancer-associated ischemic stroke (CAIS) and the relationship of D-dimer value with CAIS. METHODS: Sixty-one acute ischemic stroke patients with cancer (cancer group) and 76 stroke patients without cancer (control group) were recruited. Cerebrovascular distribution was divided into 3 circulations and 23 vascular territories, and acute multiple brain infarcts (AMBIs) were defined as discrete MRI diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) lesions in >1 vascular territory. RESULTS: Cancer patients had higher average D-dimer and fibrinogen degradation product values, and fewer stroke risk factors. The numbers of infarct-affected vascular territories, AMBIs, and AMBIs in multiple circulations were significantly higher in the cancer group. Receiver operating characteristic analysis showed that the cutoff value of D-dimer was 2.785 μg/ml; and above features were particularly evident in cancer patients whose D-dimer values were >2.785 μg/ml, while those with D-dimer values ≤2.785 μg/ml were similar to controls. CONCLUSIONS: D-dimer >2.785 μg/ml may be an effective cutoff value and a sensitive index for identifying CAIS patients. AMBIs in ≥3 vascular territories and AMBIs in both the anterior and posterior circulations are two imaging characteristics of CAIS.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: