Pulmonary embolism is incidentally diagnosed in up to 5% of patients with cancer on routine imaging scans. The clinical relevance and optimal therapy for incidental pulmonary embolism, particularly distal clots, is unclear. The aim of the current study was to assess current treatment strategies and the long-term clinical outcomes of incidentally detected pulmonary embolism in patients with cancer.We conducted an international, prospective, observational cohort study between October 22, 2012, and December 31, 2017. Unselected adults with active cancer and a recent diagnosis of incidental pulmonary embolism were eligible. Outcomes were recurrent venous thromboembolism, major bleeding, and all-cause mortality during 12 months of follow-up. Outcome events were centrally adjudicated.A total of 695 patients were included. Mean age was 66 years and 58% of patients were male. Most frequent cancer types were colorectal (21%) and lung cancer (15%). Anticoagulant therapy was initiated in 675 patients (97%), of whom 600 (89%) were treated with low-molecular-weight heparin. Recurrent venous thromboembolism occurred in 41 patients (12-month cumulative incidence, 6.0%; 95% CI, 4.4% to 8.1%), major bleeding in 39 patients (12-month cumulative incidence, 5.7%; 95% CI, 4.1% to 7.7%), and 283 patients died (12-month cumulative incidence, 43%; 95% CI, 39% to 46%). The 12-month incidence of recurrent venous thromboembolism was 6.4% in those with subsegmental pulmonary embolism compared with 6.0% in those with more proximal pulmonary embolism (subdistribution hazard ratio, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.37 to 2.9; P = .93).In patients with cancer with incidental pulmonary embolism, risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism is significant despite anticoagulant treatment. Patients with subsegmental pulmonary embolism seemed to have a risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism comparable to that of patients with more proximal clots.
In patients clinically suspected of having pulmonary embolism (PE), physicians often rely on intuitive estimation ("gestalt") of PE presence. Although shown to be predictive, gestalt is criticized for its assumed variation across physicians and lack of standardization.To assess the diagnostic accuracy of gestalt in the diagnosis of PE and gain insight into its possible variation.We performed an individual patient data meta-analysis including patients suspected of having PE. The primary outcome was diagnostic accuracy of gestalt for the diagnosis of PE, quantified as risk ratio (RR) between gestalt and PE based on 2-stage random-effect log-binomial meta-analysis regression as well as gestalts' sensitivity and specificity. The variability of these measures was explored across different health care settings, publication period, PE prevalence, patient subgroups (sex, heart failure, chronic lung disease, and items of the Wells score other than gestalt), and age.We analyzed 20 770 patients suspected of having PE from 16 original studies. The prevalence of PE in patients with and without a positive gestalt was 28.8% vs 9.1%, respectively. The overall RR was 3.02 (95% CI, 2.35-3.87), and the overall sensitivity and specificity were 74% (95% CI, 68%-79%) and 61% (95% CI, 53%-68%), respectively. Although variation was observed across individual studies (I2, 90.63%), the diagnostic accuracy was consistent across all subgroups and health care settings.A positive gestalt was associated with a 3-fold increased risk of PE in suspected patients. Although variation was observed across studies, the RR of gestalt was similar across prespecified subgroups and health care settings, exemplifying its diagnostic value for all patients suspected of having PE.
Venous thromboembolism is a common complication of cancer, but the risk of developing venous thromboembolism varies greatly among individuals and depends on numerous factors, including type of cancer. We aimed to develop and externally validate a clinical prediction model for cancer-associated venous thromboembolism.We used data from the prospective Vienna Cancer and Thrombosis Study (CATS) cohort (n=1423) to select prognostic variables for inclusion in the model. We then validated the model in the prospective Multinational Cohort Study to Identify Cancer Patients at High Risk of Venous Thromboembolism (MICA) cohort (n=832). We calculated c-indices to show how the predicted incidence of objectively confirmed venous thromboembolism at 6 months compared with the cumulative 6-month incidences observed in both cohorts.Two variables were selected for inclusion in the final clinical prediction model: tumour-site risk category (low or intermediate vs high vs very high) and continuous D-dimer concentrations. The multivariable subdistribution hazard ratios were 1·96 (95% CI 1·41-2·72; p=0·0001) for high or very high versus low or intermediate and 1·32 (95% CI 1·12-1·56; p=0·001) per doubling of D-dimer concentration. The cross-validated c-indices of the final model were 0·66 (95% CI 0·63-0·67) in CATS and 0·68 (0·62-0·74) in MICA. The clinical prediction model was adequately calibrated in both cohorts.An externally validated clinical prediction model incorporating only one clinical factor (tumour-site category) and one biomarker (D-dimer) predicted the risk of venous thromboembolism in ambulatory patients with solid cancers. This simple model is a considerable improvement on previous models for predicting cancer-associated venous thromboembolism, and could aid physicians in selection of patients who will likely benefit from thromboprophylaxis.Austrian Science Fund, Austrian National Bank Memorial Fund, and participating hospitals.
How diagnostic strategies for suspected pulmonary embolism (PE) perform in relevant patient subgroups defined by sex, age, cancer, and previous venous thromboembolism (VTE) is unknown.To evaluate the safety and efficiency of the Wells and revised Geneva scores combined with fixed and adapted D-dimer thresholds, as well as the YEARS algorithm, for ruling out acute PE in these subgroups.MEDLINE from 1 January 1995 until 1 January 2021.16 studies assessing at least 1 diagnostic strategy.Individual-patient data from 20 553 patients.Safety was defined as the diagnostic failure rate (the predicted 3-month VTE incidence after exclusion of PE without imaging at baseline). Efficiency was defined as the proportion of individuals classified by the strategy as "PE considered excluded" without imaging tests. Across all strategies, efficiency was highest in patients younger than 40 years (47% to 68%) and lowest in patients aged 80 years or older (6.0% to 23%) or patients with cancer (9.6% to 26%). However, efficiency improved considerably in these subgroups when pretest probability-dependent D-dimer thresholds were applied. Predicted failure rates were highest for strategies with adapted D-dimer thresholds, with failure rates varying between 2% and 4% in the predefined patient subgroups.Between-study differences in scoring predictor items and D-dimer assays, as well as the presence of differential verification bias, in particular for classifying fatal events and subsegmental PE cases, all of which may have led to an overestimation of the predicted failure rates of adapted D-dimer thresholds.Overall, all strategies showed acceptable safety, with pretest probability-dependent D-dimer thresholds having not only the highest efficiency but also the highest predicted failure rate. From an efficiency perspective, this individual-patient data meta-analysis supports application of adapted D-dimer thresholds.Dutch Research Council. (PROSPERO: CRD42018089366).
Introduction In cancer patients, current guidance suggests similar treatment for incidental and symptomatic venous thromboembolism (VTE), mainly based on retrospective data. We aimed to evaluate anticoagulant therapy in cancer patients with incidental and symptomatic VTE. Methods The Hokusai VTE Cancer Study was a randomised controlled trial comparing edoxaban with dalteparin for cancer-associated VTE. The primary outcome was the composite of first recurrent VTE or major bleeding. Secondary outcomes included major bleeding, recurrent VTE and mortality. Outcomes in patients with incidental and symptomatic VTE were evaluated during the 12-month study period. Results 331 patients with incidental VTE and 679 patients with symptomatic VTE were enrolled, of whom the index event was confirmed by an independent radiologist. Median durations of anticoagulant treatment were 195 and 189 days, respectively. In patients with incidental VTE, the primary outcome occurred in 12.7% of patients, major bleeding in 6.6% of patients and recurrent VTE in 7.9% of patients. Out of the 26 VTE recurrences in patients with incidental VTE, five (31%) were incidental, seven (44%) were symptomatic and four (25%) were deaths for which pulmonary embolism could not be ruled out. In patients with symptomatic VTE, the primary outcome occurred in 13.8% of patients, major bleeding in 4.9% of patients and recurrent VTE in 10.9% of patients. All-cause mortality was similar in both groups. Conclusion Clinical adverse outcomes are substantial in both cancer patients with incidental and symptomatic VTE, supporting current guideline recommendations that suggest treating incidental VTE in the same manner as symptomatic VTE.
OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to examine the existence of selective citation practices in the imaging literature by assessing whether diagnostic accuracy studies with positive titles or conclusions are cited more frequently than those with negative (or neutral) titles or conclusions. MATERIALS AND METHODS. MEDLINE was searched for meta-analyses of diagnostic accuracy studies published in imaging journals from January 2005 to April 2016. Primary studies from the meta-analyses were screened for eligibility. Titles and conclusions were classified independently in duplicate. A negative binomial regression analysis controlling for several confounding variables was performed to obtain regression coefficients; p values were obtained via likelihood ratio testing. RESULTS. A total of 995 primary studies were included. Fifty-one titles (5.1%) and 782 conclusions (78.6%) were positive or positive with qualifiers; 942 titles (94.7%) and 127 conclusions (12.8%) were neutral; and two titles (0.02%) and 86 conclusions (8.6%) were negative. Studies with positive, neutral, and negative titles were cited a mean of 0.66, 0.50, and 0.06 times per month. Studies with positive, neutral, and negative conclusions were cited a mean of 0.54, 0.42, and 0.34 times per month. Regression coefficients were 1.10 (95% CI, -0.08 to 2.20) and 0.91 (95% CI, -0.27 to 2.00) for positive and neutral titles, relative to negative titles. Regression coefficients were 0.19 (95% CI, 0.03-0.35) and 0.08 (95% CI, -0.12 to 0.27) for positive and neutral conclusions, relative to negative conclusions. Title and conclusion positivity demonstrated positive association with citation rate (p = 0.031 for both). CONCLUSION. Studies with positive titles or conclusions are cited more frequently in imaging diagnostic accuracy literature. This difference may contribute to overestimation of the accuracy of a test and, consequently, suboptimal patient outcomes.
