Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,052

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Duration of Prophylaxis against Venous Thromboembolism with Enoxaparin after Surgery for Cancer

Open access
Bergqvist, David, Agnelli, Giancarlo, Cohen, Alexander T., Eldor, Amiram, Nilsson, Paul E., Le Moigne-Amrani, Anne, Dietrich-Neto, Flavia·2002·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Abdominal surgery for cancer carries a high risk of venous thromboembolism, but the optimal duration of postoperative thromboprophylaxis is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, multicenter trial in which patients undergoing planned curative open surgery for abdominal or pelvic cancer received enoxaparin (40 mg subcutaneously) daily for 6 to 10 days and were then randomly assigned to receive either enoxaparin or placebo for another 21 days. Bilateral venography was performed between days 25 and 31, or sooner if symptoms of venous thromboembolism occurred. The primary end point with respect to efficacy was the incidence of venous thromboembolism between days 25 and 31. The primary safety end point was bleeding during the three-week period after randomization. The patients were followed for three months. RESULTS: The intention-to-treat analysis of efficacy included 332 patients. The rates of venous thromboembolism at the end of the double-blind phase were 12.0 percent in the placebo group and 4.8 percent in the enoxaparin group (P=0.02). This difference persisted at three months (13.8 percent vs. 5.5 percent, P=0.01). Three patients in the enoxaparin group and six in the placebo group died within three months after surgery. There were no significant differences in the rates of bleeding or other complications during the double-blind or follow-up periods. CONCLUSIONS: Enoxaparin prophylaxis for four weeks after surgery for abdominal or pelvic cancer is safe and significantly reduces the incidence of venographically demonstrated thrombosis, as compared with enoxaparin prophylaxis for one week.

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/nejmoa012385

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 1,052

Metadata

Authors
Bergqvist, D., Agnelli, G., Cohen, A. T., Eldor, A., Nilsson, P. E., Le Moigne-Amrani, A., & Dietrich-Neto, F.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2002-03-28
Volume
346
Issue
13
Pages
975-980
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2041585489
Cited by
1,052
References
0
FWCI
22.39
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: Duration of Prophylaxis against Venous Thromboembolism with Enoxaparin after Surgery for Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmoa012385
The paper
Bergqvist, D., Agnelli, G., Cohen, A. T., Eldor, A., Nilsson, P. E., Le Moigne-Amrani, A., & Dietrich-Neto, F. (2002). Duration of Prophylaxis against Venous Thromboembolism with Enoxaparin after Surgery for Cancer. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa012385

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.