BackgroundVenous thromboembolism (VTE) is a leading cause of death among patients with cancer. Outpatients with cancer should be periodically assessed for VTE risk, for which the Khorana score is commonly recommended. However, it has been questioned whether this tool is sufficiently accurate at identifying patients who should receive thromboprophylaxis. The present work proposes a new index, TiC-Onco risk score to be calculated at the time of diagnosis of cancer, that examines patients’ clinical and genetic risk factors for thrombosis.MethodsWe included 391 outpatients with a recent diagnosis of cancer and candidates for systemic outpatient chemotherapy. All were treated according to standard guidelines. The study population was monitored for 6 months, and VTEs were recorded. The Khorana and the TiC-Onco scores were calculated for each patient and their VTE predictive accuracy VTEs was compared.ResultsWe recorded 71 VTEs. The TiC-Onco risk score was significantly better at predicting VTE than the Khorana score (AUC 0.73 vs. 0.58, sensitivity 49 vs. 22%, specificity 81 vs. 82%, PPV 37 vs. 22%, and NPV 88 vs. 82%).ConclusionsTiC-Onco risk score performed significantly better than Khorana score at identifying cancer patients at high risk of VTE who would benefit from personalised thromboprophylaxis.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a complex, multifactorial problem, the development of which depends on a combination of genetic and acqfiguired risk factors. In a Spanish population, the Thrombo inCode score (or TiC score), which combines clinical and genetic risk components, was recently proven better at determining the risk of VTE than the commonly used model involving the analysis of two genetic variants associated with thrombophilia: the Factor V Leiden (F5 rs6025) and the G20210A prothrombin (F2 rs1799963).The aim of the present case–control study was to validate the VTE risk predictive capacity of the TiC score in a Northern European population (from Sweden).The study included 173 subjects with VTE and 196 controls. All were analyzed for the genetic risk variants included in the TiC gene panel. Standard measures —receiver operating characteristic (ROC) area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and odds ratio (OR)—were calculated.The TiC score returned an AUC value of 0.673, a sensitivity of 72.25%, a specificity of 60.62%, and an OR of 4.11. These AUC, sensitivity, and OR values are all greater than those associated with the currently used combination of genetic variants. A TiC version adjusted for the allelic frequencies of the Swedish population significantly improved its AUC value (0.783).In summary, the TiC score returned more reliable risk estimates for the studied Northern European population than did the analysis of the Factor V Leiden and the G20210A genetic variations in combination. Thus, the TiC score can be reliably used with European populations, despite differences in allelic frequencies.

No abstract