Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 221

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A Comparison of the Safety and Efficacy of Oral Antiocoagulation for the Treatment of Venous Thromboembolic Disease in Patients with or without Malignancy

Legnani, Cristina, Lee, Agnes, Manotti, Cesare, Hirsh, Jack, D’Angelo, Armando, Pengo, Vittorio, Moia, Marco, Coccheri, Sergio, Palareti, Gualtiero·2000·Thrombosis and Haemostasis

Abstract

Summary: The optimal long-term treatment of acute venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with malignancy remains undefined. In particular, based on current evidence, it is uncertain whether secondary prophylaxis using standard intensity oral anticoagulant therapy is associated with higher risks of bleeding and recurrent thrombosis in patients with cancer than in those without cancer. This study compared the outcome of anticoagulation courses in 95 patients with malignancy with those of 733 patients without malignancy. All patients were participants in a large, nation-wide population study and were prospectively followed from the initiation of their oral anticoagulant therapy. Based on 744 patient-years of treatment and follow-up, the rates of major (5.4% vs 0.9%), minor (16.2% vs 3.6%) and total (21.6% vs 4.5%) bleeding were statistically significantly higher in cancer patients compared with patients without cancer. Bleeding was also a more frequent cause of early anticoagulation withdrawal in patients with malignancy (4.2% vs. 0.7%; p <0.01; RR 6.2 (95%CI 1.95-19.4). There was a trend towards a higher rate of thrombotic complications in cancer patients (6.8% vs. 2.5%; p = 0.058; RR 2.5 [CI 0.96-6.5]) but this did not achieve statistical significance. In the group of patients with cancer, the bleeding rate was high across the different INR categories and was independent of the temporally associated International Normalized Ratio (INR). In contrast, the bleeding rate was increased only with INR values greater than 4.5 in the group of patients without cancer. The rate of thrombotic events was significantly higher in both cohorts when the INR was less than 2.0. In conclusion, patients with malignancy treated with oral anticoagulants have a higher rate of bleeding and possibly an increased risk of recurrent thrombosis compared with patients without malignancy. Safer and more effective anticoagulant therapy is needed for this challenging group of patients.

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 · 10.1055/s-0037-1614120

Cites

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

Cited by

See all 221

Metadata

Authors
Legnani, C., Lee, A., Manotti, C., Hirsh, J., D’Angelo, A., Pengo, V., Moia, M., Coccheri, S., & Palareti, G.
Venue
Thrombosis and Haemostasis
Published
2000
Volume
84
Issue
11
Pages
805-810
ISSN
  • 0340-6245 (ISSN-L)
  • 2567-689X
OpenAlex
W2415051668
Cited by
221
References
0
FWCI
4.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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 Comparison of the Safety and Efficacy of Oral Antiocoagulation for the Treatment of Venous Thromboembolic Disease in Patients with or without Malignancy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1055/s-0037-1614120
The paper
Legnani, C., Lee, A., Manotti, C., Hirsh, J., D’Angelo, A., Pengo, V., Moia, M., Coccheri, S., & Palareti, G. (2000). A Comparison of the Safety and Efficacy of Oral Antiocoagulation for the Treatment of Venous Thromboembolic Disease in Patients with or without Malignancy. Thrombosis and Haemostasis. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0037-1614120

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.