The assessment of thrombotic risk using a predictive model in metastatic cancer patients undergoing first-line therapy

Platelet Parameters as Biomarkers for Thrombosis Risk in Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) is a major cause of both morbidity and mortality in cancer patients. Platelet count has been investigated as a predictor of CAT in various settings while knowledge on platelet activation parameters is sparse. This report provides a systematic review and meta-analysis on available literature on associations between platelet count and/or function and arterial and venous thrombosis in adult cancer patients. The review was performed according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. PubMed and Embase were searched up to March 2022. The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute's tools were used for quality assessment. In total, 100 studies were included which investigated the association between CAT and platelet count (n = 90), platelet indices (n = 19), and platelet function/activation markers (n = 13) in patients with solid cancers (n = 61), hematological cancers (n = 17), or mixed cancer types (n = 22). Eighty-one studies had venous thrombosis as their outcome measure, while 4 had arterial thrombosis and 15 studies had both. We found significantly elevated odds ratio of 1.50 (95% confidence interval: 1.19-1.88) for thrombosis with higher platelet counts. We saw a tendency toward an association between markers of platelet activation in forms of mean platelet volume and soluble P selectin and both arterial and venous thrombosis. Only one study investigated dynamic platelet function using flow cytometry. In conclusion, platelet count is associated with CAT across different cancer types and settings. Platelet function or activation marker analysis may be valuable in assisting thrombosis risk assessment in cancer patients but is sparsely investigated so far.

The Khorana score for prediction of venous thromboembolism in cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

We aimed to evaluate the performance of the Khorana score in predicting venous thromboembolic events in ambulatory cancer patients. Embase and MEDLINE were searched from January 2008 to June 2018 for studies which evaluated the Khorana score. Two authors independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Additional data on the 6-month incidence of venous thromboembolism were sought by contacting corresponding authors. The incidence in each Khorana score risk group was estimated with random effects meta-analysis. A total of 45 articles and eight abstracts were included, comprising 55 cohorts enrolling 34,555 ambulatory cancer patients. For 27,849 patients (81%), 6-month follow-up data were obtained. Overall, 19% of patients had a Khorana score of 0 points, 64% a score of 1 or 2 points, and 17% a score of 3 or more points. The incidence of venous thromboembolism in the first six months was 5.0% (95%CI: 3.9-6.5) in patients with a low-risk Khorana score (0 points), 6.6% (95%CI: 5.6-7.7) in those with an intermediate-risk Khorana score (1 or 2 points), and 11.0% (95%CI: 8.8-13.8) in those with a high-risk Khorana score (3 points or higher). Of the patients with venous thromboembolism in the first six months, 23.4% (95%CI: 18.4-29.4) had been classified as high risk according to the Khorana score. In conclusion, the Khorana score can be used to select ambulatory cancer patients at high risk of venous thromboembolism for thromboprophylaxis; however, most events occur outside this high-risk group.