Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 680

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Deep-Vein Thrombosis and the Incidence of Subsequent Symptomatic Cancer

Open access
Prandoni, Paolo, Lensing, Anthonie W.A., Büller, Harry R., Cogo, Alberto, Prins, Martin H., Cattelan, Anna M., Cuppini, Stefano, Noventa, Franco, ten Cate, Jan W.·1992·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In contrast to the established relation between overt cancer and subsequent venous thromboembolism, it is unclear whether symptomatic deep-vein thrombosis is associated with a risk of subsequent overt malignant disease. METHODS: Two hundred sixty consecutive patients with symptomatic, venographically proved deep-vein thrombosis were enrolled in a study, of whom 250 were followed during a two-year period. Among those assessed during follow-up, the incidence of subsequently detected cancer in the 105 patients with secondary venous thrombosis (i.e., thrombosis associated with a well-recognized risk factor other than cancer) was compared with the incidence of cancer in the 145 patients with idiopathic venous thrombosis. RESULTS: Routine examination at the time of diagnosis of the venous thrombosis revealed cancer in 5 of the 153 enrolled patients with idiopathic venous thrombosis (3.3 percent) and in none of the 107 enrolled patients with secondary venous thrombosis. During follow-up, overt cancer developed in 2 of the 105 patients with secondary venous thrombosis (1.9 percent) and in 11 of the 145 patients with idiopathic venous thrombosis (7.6 percent; odds ratio, 2.3; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.0 to 5.2; P = 0.043). Of the 145 patients with idiopathic venous thrombosis, 35 had confirmed recurrent thromboembolism. Overt cancer subsequently developed in 6 of the 35 (17.1 percent). The incidence of cancer in the patients with recurrent idiopathic venous thrombosis was higher than that in the patients with secondary venous thrombosis (P = 0.008; odds ratio, 9.8; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.8 to 52.2) or in the patients with idiopathic venous thrombosis that did not recur (P = 0.024; odds ratio, 4.3; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.2 to 15.3). CONCLUSIONS: There is a statistically significant and clinically important association between idiopathic venous thrombosis and the subsequent development of clinically overt cancer, especially among patients in whom venous thromboembolism recurs during follow-up.

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 · 10.1056/nejm199210153271604

Cites

1 of 1 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 1 references

Cited by

See all 680

Metadata

Authors
Prandoni, P., Lensing, A. W. A., Büller, H. R., Cogo, A., Prins, M. H., Cattelan, A. M., Cuppini, S., Noventa, F., & ten Cate, J. W.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
1992-10-15
Volume
327
Issue
16
Pages
1128-1133
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W1967832446
Cited by
680
References
1
FWCI
16.45
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: Deep-Vein Thrombosis and the Incidence of Subsequent Symptomatic Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm199210153271604
The paper
Prandoni, P., Lensing, A. W. A., Büller, H. R., Cogo, A., Prins, M. H., Cattelan, A. M., Cuppini, S., Noventa, F., & ten Cate, J. W. (1992). Deep-Vein Thrombosis and the Incidence of Subsequent Symptomatic Cancer. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199210153271604

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.