Utility of the Khorana and the new-Vienna CATS prediction scores in cancer patients of the HYPERCAN cohort

Verzeroli, Cristina; Giaccherini, Cinzia; Russo, Laura; Bolognini, Silvia; Gamba, Sara; Tartari, Carmen J; Schieppati, Francesca; Ticozzi, Chiara; Vignoli, Alfonso; Masci, Giovanna; Sarmiento, Roberta; Spinelli, Daniele; Malighetti, Paolo; Tondini, Carlo; Petrelli, Fausto; Giuliani, Francesco; D’Alessio, Andrea; Gasparini, Giampietro; Minelli, Mauro; Braud, Filippo de; Santoro, Armando; Labianca, Roberto; Marchetti, Marina; Falanga, Anna

doi:10.1016/j.jtha.2023.03.037

Cited by 11 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Both baseline TFA and D-dimer were significantly more specific and had a better positive predictive value than KS ≥ 2, without difference in terms of sensitivity. Consequently, the use of these biomarkers could have a greater potency to select patients for preventive anticoagulant therapy than the selection of patients by the KS, which is not so effective in LC, as shown once again in a large prospective cohort [ 44 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Plasma tissue factor activity in lung cancer patients predicts venous thromboembolism and poor overall survival

Doubre,

Monnet,

Azarian

et al. 2024

Research and Practice in Thrombosis and Haemostasis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Plasma tissue factor activity in lung cancer patients predicts venous thromboembolism and poor overall survival

Doubre,

Monnet,

Azarian

et al. 2024

Research and Practice in Thrombosis and Haemostasis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The patients were then stratified according to a predefined risk set at 10%, which corresponds to 100 points by the nomogram [ 33 ]. We additionally used a second cut-off set of 5% (60 points), according to our last publication, which considered this value as a high enough risk, to give a guideline to start thromboprophylaxis [ 14 ].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the outpatient care setting, to avoid unnecessary anticoagulant exposure to subjects at low VTE risk, international scientific guidelines consider the use of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis only for patients at high risk of VTE, as estimated by risk assessment models (RAMs) [ 12 ], including the Khorana risk score (KRS) and the new-Vienna CATS risk score. Nevertheless, in patients with metastatic lung cancer initiating chemotherapy, the KRS is unable to identify subjects at high risk of VTE, while little information is available on the validity of the new-Vienna CATS score [ 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Of interest when considering specific cancer outcomes other than VTE, some of these RAMs outperform in the identification of subjects at a higher risk of disease progression or mortality [ 21 , 22 , 23 ]. We recently reported the inability of the KRS, as compared to the new-Vienna CATS score, to discriminate subjects at higher risk of VTE in the prospective HYPERCAN cohort of metastatic cancer patients, while both RAMs significantly stratified patients at higher risk of mortality [ 14 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A New Risk Prediction Model for Venous Thromboembolism and Death in Ambulatory Lung Cancer Patients

Gomez-Rosas,

Giaccherini,

Russo

et al. 2023

Cancers

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(1) Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a frequent complication in ambulatory lung cancer patients during chemotherapy and is associated with increased mortality. (2) Methods: We analyzed 568 newly diagnosed metastatic lung cancer patients prospectively enrolled in the HYPERCAN study. Blood samples collected before chemotherapy were tested for thrombin generation (TG) and a panel of hemostatic biomarkers. The Khorana risk score (KRS), new-Vienna CATS, PROTECHT, and CONKO risk assessment models (RAMs) were applied. (3) Results: Within 6 months, the cumulative incidences of VTE and mortality were 12% and 29%, respectively. Patients with VTE showed significantly increased levels of D-dimer, FVIII, prothrombin fragment 1 + 2, and TG. D-dimer and ECOG performance status were identified as independent risk factors for VTE and mortality by multivariable analysis and utilized to generate a risk score that provided a cumulative incidence of VTE of 6% vs. 25%, death of 19% vs. 55%, and in the low- vs. high-risk group, respectively (p < 0.001). While all published RAMs significantly stratified patients for risk of death, only the CATS and CONKO were able to stratify patients for VTE. (4) Conclusions: A new prediction model was generated to stratify lung cancer patients for VTE and mortality risk, where other published RAMs failed.

show abstract

“…It includes the following parameters: Both the Khorana score and the Vienna CATS score have been widely studied and have shown utility in risk stratification for CAT. 191 However, it is important to note that the success and applicability of these scores may differ contingent on the particular patient population and the context in which they are used. It is important to note that while these scoring systems can provide valuable risk assessment information, they are not infallible and should be used in conjunction with clinical judgment.…”

Section: Guidelines For Cancer-associated Thrombosis Prevention In Ca...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: Epidemiology, Pathophysiological Mechanisms, Treatment, and Risk Assessment

Pavlovic,

Niciforovic,

Markovic

et al. 2023

Clin Med Insights Oncol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cancer patients represent a growing population with drastically difficult care and a lowered quality of life, especially due to the heightened risk of vast complications. Thus, it is well established so far that one of the most prominent complications in individuals with cancer is venous thromboembolism. Since there are various improved methods for screening and diagnosing cancer and its complications, the incidence of cancer-associated thrombosis has been on the rise in recent years. Therefore, the high mortality and morbidity rates among these patients are not a surprise. Consequently, there is an excruciating need for understanding the mechanisms behind this complex process, as well as the imperative for adequate analysis and application of the most suitable steps for cancer-associated thrombosis prevention. There are various and numerous mechanisms offering potential answers to cancer-associated thrombosis, some of which have already been elucidated in various preclinical and clinical scenarios, yet further and more elaborate studies are crucial to understanding and preventing this complex and harsh clinical entity. This article elaborates on the growing incidence, mortality, morbidity, and risk factors of cancer-associated thrombosis while emphasizing the pathophysiological mechanisms in the light of various types of cancer in patients and summarizes the most novel therapy and prevention guidelines recommendations.

show abstract

Utility of the Khorana and the new-Vienna CATS prediction scores in cancer patients of the HYPERCAN cohort

Cited by 11 publications

References 44 publications

Plasma tissue factor activity in lung cancer patients predicts venous thromboembolism and poor overall survival

Plasma tissue factor activity in lung cancer patients predicts venous thromboembolism and poor overall survival

A New Risk Prediction Model for Venous Thromboembolism and Death in Ambulatory Lung Cancer Patients

Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: Epidemiology, Pathophysiological Mechanisms, Treatment, and Risk Assessment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About