Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 212

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A meta‐analysis and systematic review of the efficacy and safety of anticoagulants as cancer treatment: Impact on survival and bleeding complications

Open access
Kuderer, Nicole M., Khorana, Alok A., Lyman, Gary H., Francis, Charles W.·2007·Cancer

Abstract

BACKGROUND.: Preclinical evidence suggests that anticoagulants, in particular the low‐molecular‐weight heparins (LMWH), exert an antitumor effect, whereas clinical trials have reported conflicting results. The authors conducted a comprehensive, systematic review and meta‐analysis of the evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs), to evaluate the impact of anticoagulants on survival and safety in cancer patients without venous thromboembolism. METHODS.: A comprehensive systematic literature review of RCTs was performed without language restrictions through May 2006 with subsequent updates to the end of 2006, including an exhaustive search of electronic databases, major conference proceedings, article references, and content experts. Two reviewers extracted data independently. Primary study outcomes were 1‐year overall mortality and all bleeding complications. Major and fatal bleeding complications were secondary outcomes. RESULTS.: Across all 11 studies that were identified, anticoagulation significantly decreased 1‐year overall mortality with a relative risk (RR) of 0.905 (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.847–0.967; P = .003). The RR for mortality was 0.877 (95% CI, 0.789–0.975; P = .015) for LMWH, compared with an RR of 0.942 (95% CI, 0.854–1.040; P = .239) for warfarin, resulting in an absolute risk difference (ARD) of 8% for LMWH and an ARD of 3% for warfarin. Improved survival with anticoagulation may be dependent on tumor type. Major bleeding episodes occurred less frequently in patients who received LMWH (ARD, 1%) compared with patients who received warfarin (ARD, 11.5%; P < .0001). Overall, fatal bleeding occurred rarely (ARD, 0.32%; P = .542). CONCLUSIONS.: Anticoagulants, particularly LMWH, significantly improved overall survival in cancer patients without venous thrombosis while increasing the risk for bleeding complications. However, given the limitations of available data, the use of anticoagulants as antineoplastic therapy cannot be recommended until additional RCTs confirm these results. Cancer 2007. © 2007 American Cancer Society.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cncr.22892

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 6 references

Cited by

See all 212

Metadata

Authors
Kuderer, N. M., Khorana, A. A., Lyman, G. H., & Francis, C. W.
Venue
Cancer
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2007-08-20
Volume
110
Issue
5
Pages
1149-1161
ISSN
  • 0008-543X (ISSN-L)
  • 1097-0142
OpenAlex
W2013564192
Cited by
212
References
6
FWCI
3.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A meta‐analysis and systematic review of the efficacy and safety of anticoagulants as cancer treatment: Impact on survival and bleeding complications. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/cncr.22892
The paper
Kuderer, N. M., Khorana, A. A., Lyman, G. H., & Francis, C. W. (2007). A meta‐analysis and systematic review of the efficacy and safety of anticoagulants as cancer treatment: Impact on survival and bleeding complications. Cancer. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.22892

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.