2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2018.06.029
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Associations of anticoagulant use with outcome in newly diagnosed glioblastoma

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…No decrease in survival was observed in patients treated with prophylactic doses of anticoagulants or with antiplatelet agents. It remains unclear whether venous thromboembolic events caused this survival difference [63]. VTE has been less investigated in patients with brain metastases; however, a retrospective study reported an incidence of 20% [64].…”
Section: Incidence and Epidemiologymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…No decrease in survival was observed in patients treated with prophylactic doses of anticoagulants or with antiplatelet agents. It remains unclear whether venous thromboembolic events caused this survival difference [63]. VTE has been less investigated in patients with brain metastases; however, a retrospective study reported an incidence of 20% [64].…”
Section: Incidence and Epidemiologymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A recent study of more than 1,000 patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma, however, did not support this hypothesis. 59 In fact, patients who were treated with anticoagulant drugs while on radio/chemotherapy had a worse survival compared with patients who did not use anticoagulants. This analysis is likely to be confounded by the fact that patients on anticoagulants mainly had prior VTE events, which might per se be associated with poor prognosis.…”
Section: Use Of Anticoagulant Therapy and Survival In Gliomamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The status of baseline metformin use or other baseline antidiabetic drug use was flagged as “positive” when they were used at any point in the period between the date of randomization minus 2 weeks and the date of the first TMZ treatment dose, and was flagged as “negative” otherwise. The status of the respective metformin use concomitant to the TMZ/RT treatment or other concomitant antidiabetic drug use was flagged as “yes” when they were used in the period between the first TMZ/RT treatment dose and start of the TMZ maintenance phase and “no” otherwise, as described . Different durations of baseline or concomitant use were summated, also for patients who used metformin on multiple occasions in the same or overlapping periods to account for the higher dose intensity for these patients.…”
Section: Exposuresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The status of the respective metformin use concomitant to the TMZ/RT treatment or other concomitant antidiabetic drug use was flagged as "yes" when they were used in the period between the first TMZ/RT treatment dose and start of the TMZ maintenance phase and "no" otherwise, as described. 21,22 Different durations of baseline or concomitant use were summated, also for patients who used metformin on multiple occasions in the same or overlapping periods to account for the higher dose intensity for these patients. The day of initial surgery for glioblastoma was set as the earliest time point to compute the duration of use.…”
Section: Antidiabetic Drug Usementioning
confidence: 99%