Evidence Hub

Venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: a population-based cohort study

F. Mulder, E. Horváth-Puhó, N. van Es, H. V. van Laarhoven, Lars Pedersen, Florian Moik, C. Ay, Harry R. Buller et al.

Blood, 2020

1,497,276 participants · 632 citations

Abstract

The incidence of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients may have changed in the past decade, possibly due to novel cancer therapies, improved survival, and high-resolution imaging. Danish medical registries were used to identify 499,092 patients with a first-time cancer diagnosis between 1997 and 2017, who were matched to 1,497,276 comparison individuals without cancer from the general population. We computed cumulative incidences of venous thromboembolism 6 and 12 months after the diagnosis/index date. Hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated using Cox regression. Risk factors were examined by computing subdistribution hazard ratios (SHRs) in a competing risk analysis. Cumulative incidence of venous thromboembolism 12 months after the cancer diagnosis/index date was 2.3% (95% confidence interval (CI), 2.2%-2.3%) in the cancer cohort and 0.35% (95% CI, 0.34%-0.36%) in the comparison cohort (HR, 8.5; 95% CI, 8.2-8.8). Important risk factors for cancer patients were prior venous thromboembolism (SHR, 7.6; 95% CI, 7.2-8.0), distant metastasis (SHR, 3.2; 95% CI, 2.9-3.4), and use of chemotherapy (SHR, 3.4; 95% CI, 3.1-3.7), protein kinase inhibitors (SHR, 4.1; 95% CI 3.4-4.9), anti-angiogenic therapy (SHR, 4.4; 95% CI, 3.8-5.2), and immunotherapy (SHR, 3.6; 2.8-4.6). Twelve-month incidence in the cancer cohort increased from 1.0% (95% CI, 0.9%-1.2%) in 1997 to 3.4% (95% CI, 2.9%-4.0%) in 2017, which was paralleled by improved 12-month survival and increased use of computed…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 1,497,276 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free