Background: Central venous catheters are convenient for drug delivery and improved comfort for cancer patients, but they also cause serious complications. The most common complication is catheter-related thrombosis (CRT). Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the incidence and risk factors for CRT in cancer patients and develop an effective prediction model for CRT in cancer patients. Methods: The development of our prediction model was based on a retrospective cohort (n = 3,131) from the National Cancer Center. Our prediction model was confirmed in a prospective cohort from the National Cancer Center (n = 685) and a retrospective cohort from the Hunan Cancer Hospital (n = 61). The predictive accuracy and discriminative ability were determined by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and calibration plots. Results: Multivariate analysis demonstrated that sex, cancer type, catheter type, position of the catheter tip, chemotherapy status, and antiplatelet/anticoagulation status at baseline were independent risk factors for CRT. The area under the ROC curve of our prediction model was 0.741 (CI: 0.715-0.766) in the primary cohort and 0.754 (CI: 0.704-0.803) and 0.658 (CI: 0.470-0.845) in validation cohorts 1 and 2, respectively. The model also showed good calibration and clinical impact in the primary and validation cohorts. Liu et al. CRT Prediction Model in Cancer Conclusions: Our model is a novel prediction tool for CRT risk that accurately assigns cancer patients into high-and low-risk groups. Our model will be valuable for clinicians when making decisions regarding thromboprophylaxis.

Background Current predictive tools assess catheter‐related thrombosis (CRT) in patients with lung cancer in a static manner at a single time point of catheterization. The subsequent hazard changes over time are unknown. The conditional catheter‐related thrombosis‐free probability (CCFP) can provide dynamic information on continual CRT‐free expectations. This study aimed to assess the CCFP and hazard rates based on risk categories and various venous access devices (VADs). Methods This retrospective study reviewed 939 patients with lung cancer with peripherally inserted central venous catheters (PICCs) or central venous catheters (CVCs) identified at the National Clinical Research Center for Cancer between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2018. The incidence of CRT has also been reported. Patients were stratified into low‐ and high‐risk groups according to multivariate Cox regression analyses. CCFP is defined as the CRT‐free probability given that patients have no CRT for a definite time. Results A total of 507 patients with PICCs and 432 patients with CVCs were included in this study. The 3‐month CCFP increased from 74.2% at catheter insertion to 93.6% at 3 months. The hazards of CRT in the first month were highest (16.4%) and slightly thereafter. The high‐risk group initially had a higher (21.4%) but significantly decreased CRT hazard after 2 months (8.3%), whereas the low‐risk group maintained a comparable lower risk hazard of less than 5% after 1 month. In the overall cohort, patients with CVCs had lower CRT probability than those with PICCs (HR, 1.76; 95% CI: 1.28–2.41; p < 0.01). Further analysis demonstrated that compared with PICCs, CVCs provided a CRT‐free benefit in low‐risk patients (p = 0.02) but not in high‐risk patients (p = 0.06). Conclusions CCFP increased, and the hazards of CRT decreased over time in a risk‐dependent manner in patients with lung cancer. These valuable dynamic data may help optimize risk‐adjusted choices of VADs and risk‐adjusted prophylactic anticoagulation strategies for patients.

No abstract

e14031 Background: The central venous catheter brings convenience for drug delivery and improves comfort for cancer patients, it also causes serious complications. The most common one is catheter-related thrombosis (CRT). This study aimed to evaluate the incidence and risk factors of CRT in cancer patients, and to develop an effective prediction model for CRT in cancer patients. Methods: The development of our prediction model was based on the data of a retrospective cohort (n = 3131) from National Cancer Center. The validation of our prediction model was done in a prospective cohort from National Cancer Center (n = 685) and a retrospective cohort from Hunan Cancer Hospital (n = 61). The predictive accuracy and the discriminative ability were determined by the receiver operating characteristic curves and calibration plots. Results: Multivariate analysis demonstrated that sex, cancer type, catheter type, position of the catheter tip, chemotherapy status, and antiplatelet/anticoagulation status at baseline were independent risk factors for CRT. The area under receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve of our prediction model was 0.741 (CI: 0.715-0.766) in the primary cohort; 0.754 (CI: 0.704-0.803) and 0.658 (CI: 0.470-0.845) in validation cohorts respectively. Good calibration and clinical impact were also shown in primary and validation cohorts. The high-risk group had a higher incidence of CRTs than the low-risk group in the primary cohort and two validation cohort (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Our model is a novel prediction tool for CRT risk which helps to assigning cancer patients into high-risk or low-risk group accurately. Our model will be valuable for clinicians in decision making of thromboprophylaxis.