You're viewing our updated article page. If you need more time to adjust, you can return to the old layout.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW article

Front. Oncol., 14 August 2024

Sec. Thoracic Oncology

Volume 14 - 2024 | https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2024.1405147

Prevalence and clinical characteristics of venous thromboembolism in patients with lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • Department of Radiation Oncology, General Hospital of Northern Theater Command, Shenyang, China

Article metrics

View details

4

Citations

3,1k

Views

1k

Downloads

Abstract

Background:

The prevalence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) is high in patients with cancer and can often present as the first symptom of malignancy. Cancer-associated VTE is one of the most important risk factors contributing to cancer mortality, making its prevention and treatment critical for patients with lung cancer.

Methods:

We systematically searched for observational studies that estimated the prevalence of VTE in patients with lung cancer. A comprehensive search of electronic databases, including PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library, was systematically conducted from database inception through January 21, 2022. The qualities of included studies were assessed in three domains, including patient selection, comparison, and results. Random effects meta-analyses of the prevalence of VTE in lung cancer were conducted using the metaprop procedure. Chi-square test and I2 value were used to evaluate study heterogeneity.

Results:

Thirty-five studies involving 742,156 patients were considered eligible for this study. The pooled prevalence of VTE among patients with lung cancer was 5% (95% CI: 0.043–0.056, P = 0.000). The regional prevalence of VTE was 7% (95% CI: 0.06–0.08; I2 = 99.2%) in North America, 8% (95% CI: 0.06–0.10; I2 = 97.6%) in Asia, 6% (95% CI: 0.04–0.09; I2 = 95.9%) in Europe and 11% (95% CI: 0.07–0.15) in Australasia.

Conclusions:

The prevalence of lung cancer-related VTE is high and region-specific. These results of this review emphasize the importance of understanding the incidence of lung cancer-related VTE and provide argue for VTE screening of patients with lung cancer.

Systematic Review Registration:

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier PROSPERO (CRD42022306400).

Introduction

Primary lung cancer is the second most prevalent malignancy worldwide but has the highest rate of mortality (1). Although the overall survival of patients with lung cancer substantially improved in the past decade with comprehensive and updated treatment strategies, including surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and immunotherapy, the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in this class of patients has further increased recently (2). Venous thromboembolism can occur at any time in the course of the disease, and may at times constitute the presenting symptoms, triggering further investigations that lead to an eventual cancer diagnosis. Venous thromboembolism is the second most important risk factor contributing to mortality, after cancer itself (3). As expected, a similar trend is also observed in lung cancer (4, 5).

Venous thromboembolism can be classified into two major clinical conditions: deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE). Large studies have shown that VTE is associated with worse outcomes in patients with cancer, including increased mortality. For instance, in one study, the one-year overall rate of survival in patients with lung cancer, who simultaneously had VTE, was 12%, compared to 36% in those without VTE (P < 0.001) (5). The mortality of those with VTE was 2.2-fold higher (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.05 to 2.40), while patients diagnosed with cancer within twelve months following a diagnosis of VTE had a one-year survival rate of 38%, compared to 47% percent in the control group without VTE (P <0.001) (6). The prevalence of cancer-related VTE varies according to patient-related factors, such as additional thrombogenic risk factors, including degree of mobility, performance status, presence of other comorbidities, past history of VTE, cancer-related factors, such as cancer location, stage, and grade, and treatment-related factors, such as whether the patient received surgery, chemotherapy, anti-angiogenic therapy, hormonal, and supportive therapy (79). Understanding and addressing the factors contributing to lung cancer-related VTE can significantly aid the prevention of VTE, which in turn reduces patient comorbidities and prevents reductions in performance status. This, in turn, helps to optimize the treatment schedules of cancer patients and is expected to benefit patient survival. Therefore, it is important to systematically analyze the characteristics of patients with VTE so that primary thromboprophylaxis with anticoagulant therapy and non-pharmacological interventions can be constituted appropriately.

At present, domestic and international guidelines for the prevention and management of VTE in cancer patients do not specifically outline the management of different VTE risk factors, nor do they suggest risk-factor specific or individualized management for VTE in patients suffering from different types of cancer. Therefore, assessment of the prevalence and characteristics of VTE in patients with lung cancer is of value toward optimizing the prevention and treatment of VTE in lung cancer. This may additionally aid in support of drafting updated guidelines to support these measures. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to determine the prevalence and patient-specific characteristics of VTE grouped by gender and regional characteristics of patients with lung cancer.

Methods

This review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 statement for systematic reviews (9). The protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), registration number: CRD42022306400.

Search strategy

Literature from the databases of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched without restrictions on language or geographical region, from the inception of the databases through January 21, 2022. Medical Subject Headings (MESH) terms and keywords used in the search included “venous thromboembolism” OR “VTE” OR “thromboembolism” OR “venous thrombosis” OR “pulmonary thrombosis” OR “pulmonary embolism” OR “pulmonary thromboembolism” OR “deep vein thrombosis”, AND “lung cancer” OR “pulmonary cancer” OR “lung tumor” OR “pulmonary tumor” OR “lung neoplasm*” OR “lung carcinoma” OR “pulmonary neoplasm*”. References of potential reviews were manually evaluated to identify additional studies relevant to these subjects. A full search strategy can be found in Appendix 1.

Eligibility criteria

Eligible studies included observational studies reporting the prevalence of VTE among patients with lung cancer as the primary malignancy.

Exclusion criteria

Studies excluded from this review included conference abstracts, duplicate studies, and publications with incomplete results.

Study selection and data extraction

Two independent reviewers screened for all included studies following the primary database search. First, duplicate studies and irrelevant literature were excluded. Each reviewer independently reviewed the full texts of each potentially eligible study, and included studies based on the aforementioned inclusion and exclusion criteria. In cases of disagreement between the reviewers, discussions around the potential study eligibility were carried out with a third reviewer until consensus was drawn.

Extraction and analysis of data were carried out by the two reviewers independently using predesigned forms based on the guideline for data extraction for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (10). The following information was extracted: the names of authors, year of publication, country of study, types of observational study carried out, sample size of the studied population, study duration, patient age, VTE subclass diagnoses (PE or DVT), locations of VTE occlusions, and the number of VTE events.

Quality assessment

The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS) (11) in three domains, including patient selection, comparison, and results. The NOS scores of observational studies are graded from 0 to 9, where higher scores indicate higher study qualities. Specifically, we grouped these scores into 3 categories: ≥7, 4–6 and 0–3, to represent studies of high, medium and low qualities, respectively.

Statistical analysis

The metaprop procedure (12) was used to perform a meta-analysis of proportions, using Stata software (version 15.1). This approach was suitable for the analysis of binomial data and permitted the evaluation of the exact binomial and test score-based confidence intervals (CI). The meta-prop procedure provided suitable strategies for dealing with proportions close to or at the margins, where the normal approximation procedures often break down. It uses a binomial distribution to model the within-study variability and allows the Freeman-Tukey double arcsine transformation to stabilize the variances. Study heterogeneity was assessed using chi-square test and I2 values, P < 0.1 or I2>50% was considered to be clinically significant, and a random-effect model was adopted. Sensitivity analyses were performed to verify the robustness of the overall results and to explore sources of heterogeneity. Subgroup analyses were conducted for lung cancer-related VTE in different genders and regions. Finally, we used funnel plots and Egger’s regression test to identify publication bias.

Results

Overall, a total of 4087 articles were found through the initial literature search based on the aforementioned search criteria. Of these, 650 duplicate articles and 3356 irrelevant articles were excluded after initial abstract screening. Eighty-one additional articles were excluded after full text screening. Out of the literature excluded, 44 were conference abstracts and 2 were trials with non-related outcomes. Altogether, 35 studies (1347) were found to be eligible for this systematic review. The literature selection process is outlined in Figure 1.

Figure 1

Figure 1

Literature screening flow chart.

Study characteristics

Among the 35 studies included with VTE listed as the primary outcome (1347), 20 were retrospective studies (13, 14, 16, 17, 1927, 35, 37, 41, 42, 4547), nine were cohort studies (15, 18, 28, 3032, 38, 40, 44) and six were case-control studies (29, 32, 33, 36, 39, 43). All studies included were published from 2005 to 2021. The number of study participants varied from a minimum of 90 to a maximum of 570,304. The studies were conducted in 12 countries, including China, the United States, Canada, Japan, Germany, Australia, Czech Republic, Korea, Greece, the Netherlands, Italy, and Great Britain, which are grouped into their respective continents for ease of categorization. Specifically, there were two (16.67%) countries categorized into the North American group, three (25%) countries in Asia, six (50%) countries in Europe, and one (8.33%) country in Australasia. Thirty studies (1319, 2128, 3034, 3640, 4347) reported the mean age of the participants, ranging from 50.34 to 72 years. International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9 or ICD-10 codes were used to label the diagnoses of VTE in five studies (16, 18, 19, 22, 28). Most of the other 30 studies combined medical history, physical examination and imaging to aid in the diagnosis of VTE. Out of all studies included, eight studies (16, 17, 31, 36, 37, 39, 41, 42) reported on VTE, two (32, 34) reported PE only, two reported DVT only (15, 21) and 23 (13, 14, 1820, 2230, 33, 35, 38, 40, 4347) simultaneously reported VTE, PE, or DVT. General characteristics of the included studies are shown in Table 1.

Table 1

Author Year Country Study type Sample size Male/female Study period Patients Age
(years)
Diagnosis of VTE/PE/DVT Number of VTE Number of PE Number of DVT Number of PE and DVT
Mason 2005 USA Retrospective 336 248/88 1990.1–2001.1 after pneumonectomy for malignancy 66.5 ± 7.5 history and physical examination, imaging or Doppler ultra-sonography 25 5 17 3
Tagalakis 2007 Canada Retrospective cohort study 493 297/196 1997.1.1–2004.12.31 Non-small cell lung cancer / patient’s medical record with the vascular laboratory records / / 67 /
Chew 2008 USA Retrospective 91933 49544/42449 1993.1–1995.12,1997.1–1999.12 primary lung cancer 50.34 ± 8.42 ICD-9-CM 3140 / / /
Connolly 2012 USA Retrospective cohort
study
6732 3329/3402 2005.1.1–2008.12.31 Ambulatory lung cancer 67 DVT: ICD-9 PE: ICD-9 CM 938 245 497 196
Huang 2012 USA Retrospective database study 2242 1087/1155 2000.7.1–2008.6.30 lung cancer undergoing chemotherapy 77.4 ± 10.8 DVT: ICD-9-CM
PE: ICD-9-CM
235 36 168 31
Yang 2012 China Retrospective 1001 656/345 2009.1–2009.12 Postoperative in
Lung Cancer
73.0 ± 10.6 Spiral computer tomography, pulmonary angiography, and color Doppler ultrasound examination 53/1001 8 41 4
Crolow C 2013 Germany Retrospective 1940 1209/731 2008.1–2010.12 lung cancer / ICD-10-GM 148 / 82 /
Alexander 2014 Australia Retrospective 222 131/91 2011.1.7–2012.6.30 lung cancer / Radiologically confirmed symptomatic or clinically unsuspected 24 16 4 1
Bohdan 2014 Czech Republic Retrospective 950 600/350 2006.1–2010.5 primary lung cancer 64.80 ± 10.67 Standard
diagnostic procedures
91 34 58 13
Kourelis 2014 USA Retrospectively 727 376/351 1998.1–2011.12 lung cancer 67.9 Venogram, computed tomographic scan or magnetic resonance imaging scans 95 34 35 6
Lee 2014 Korea Retrospectively 1998 1338/660 2006.1–2010.6 non-small cell lung cancer 66.7 Computerized tomography, CT angiography, Doppler ultrasonography, and conventional angiography or nuclear medicine (ventilation/perfusion
scans)
131 72 16 24
Zhang 2014 China Retrospective 673 486/187 2009.1–2011.1 lung cancer 72 Venous ultrasound imaging or a CT
venous angiogram
89 33 42 14
Steuer 2015 USA Retrospective cohort study 570304 274543/248187 2006–2010 hospitalized lung cancer 61 ICD-9 20672 14030 / /
Wang 2015 China Case-control study 4726 / 2004.1–2013.7 non-small cell lung cancer 65 Duplex ultrasound or computed tomography angiography 61 5 45 11
Walker 2016 UK Cohort study 10598 / 1997.4.1–2006.12.31 lung cancer 60 Relevant medical code in either the CPRD and HES 364 / / /
Ma 2017 China Retrospective case-control study 90 60/30 2010.1–2015.1 lung cancer 68 PE:echocardiography, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, or ventilation/perfusion / 30 / /
Shen 2017 China Case-
control study
1560 / 2012.3–2015.5 non-small cell lung cancer 66.7 DVT: venous ultrasound image or a CT venous angiogram. PE: CT pulmonary angiogram or a ventilation-perfusion scan 32 12 14 6
Li 2018 China Rretrospective cohort study 11474 / 2012.1–2015.7 Lung cancer surgery 58 PE:computed
tomographic pulmonary angiograph, or echocardiography
/ 56 / 5
Thomas 2018 USA Retrospective 14308 / 2005–2015 After lung cancer resection 66.5 ± 7.5 Computer tomography exam, transesophageal echocardiogram, pulmonary arteriogram, CT angiogram, or any other definitive imaging modality 234 116 150 32
Fu 2019 China Case-control study 200 95/105 / Lung cancer after chemotherapy / Doppler ultrasonic examination 40 / / /
Makoto 2019 Japan Retrospective 682 449/233 2014.1–2016.12 lung cancer 50.34 ± 8.42 DVT: venous ultrasonography or contrast enhanced computed tomography.
PE: CT pulmonary angiography
71 / / /
Liu 2020 China Propensity cohort 106 57/49 2006.1–2016.12 Elderly with lung cancer 67 CT pulmonary angiography features. / 53 31 /
Suzuki 2020 Japan Retrospective cohort 1471 1028/443 2008–2017 lung cancer 77.4 ± 10.8 Contrast-enhanced computed tomography or echography of the lower limb veins, or mismatch of lung ventilation/perfusion scintigraphy 28 5 14 9
Wang 2020 China Retrospective 600 339/261 2018.1–2019.8 lung cancer after surgery 73.0 ± 10.6 Computer tomography pulmonary angiogram. 77 / / /
Akhtar-Danesh 2021 Canada Retrospective 12626 5923/6703 2007–2017 Lung cancer surgery / VTEs were investigated and subsequently diagnosed based on symptoms 345 / / /
Cui 2021 China Case-control study 100 43/57 2013.1–2019.5 lung cancer / Pulmonary Computed Tomography Angiography / 40 9 /
Dimakakos 2021 Greece Retrospective 217 176/41 2015.1–2018.6 Small cell lung cancer 64.80 ± 10.67 Computed tomography pulmonary angiograph, ventilation/perfusion lung scintigraphy, or venous duplex ultrasonography 9 6 3 /
Deschênes-Simard 2021 Canada Retrospective multicentric
cohort study
593 322/271 2013.6–2020.9 Non-small cell lung cancer 67.9 Doppler ultrasonography, computed tomography pulmonary angiograph, and magnetic resonance imaging 59 36 16 /
Takemoto 2021 Japan Retrospective 944 563/381 2013.6–2018.12 Lung cancer before surgery 66.7 Venous ultrasonography and computed tomography / 1 91 /
Zhang 2021 China Retrospective 952 418/534 2010.5–2018.8 adenocarcinoma of the lung undergoing surgical resection 72 DVT: venous ultrasound or computed tomography venous angiogram,
PE: computer tomography or ventilation-perfusion scanning
100 7 86 7
Blom 2004 Netherlands Retrospective 537 429/108 1990.1–2000.12 lung cancer 61 The medical records and consult the general practitioner of the patient 39 15 17 7
Patel 2009 Canada Retrospective 186 122/64 1996.1–2007.12 multimodality
therapy for lung cancer
65 PE: computed tomography scan or V/Q scan, DVT: Doppler ultrasonography 23 / / /
Buosi 2013 Italy Retrospective 307 245/62 2008.1–2011.5 Non-small cell lung cancer 60 Symptomatic DVT, echocolordoppler or computed tomography; symptomatic PE, CT or pulmonary angiography; asymptomatic DVT, echocolordoppler or CT; asymptomatic PE, CT or pulmonary angiography / / 36 /
Agzarian 2015 Canada Prospective cohort study. 157 72/85 2013.6–2014.12 After lung cancer resection and discharge 68 Radiographic screening 19 14 3 /
Li 2020 China Case-control study 171 75/96 2016.7–2017.12 After radical operation of non-small cell lung cancer 66.7 Doppler ultrasonography and computer tomography pulmonary angiography 23 / / /

Characteristics of studies included in the review.

Quality bias assessment

The qualities of all eligible studies in our meta-analysis, evaluated using the NOS scale, are outlined in Table 2. Twenty-eight (80%) studies (1316, 1926, 2931, 33, 34, 3639, 4147) scored seven or higher, which were classified as high quality. Seven (20%) studies (17, 18, 27, 28, 32, 35, 40) scored between four and six inclusive and were classified as medium quality. There were no low-quality studies scoring three or below. Our 35 studies had a mean NOS score of 7.486, indicating high quality of the studies included in this series of studies reviewed.

Table 2

COHORT STUDIES
First author Year Selection Comparability Outcome Overall quality score
Mason 2005 ★★★★ ★★ ★★ 8
Tagalakis 2007 ★★★★ ★★ 7
Chew 2008 ★★★ ★★★ 7
Connolly 2012 ★★★ ★★ 6
Huang 2012 ★★★★ ★★ ★★ 8
Yang 2012 ★★★ ★★ ★★ 7
Crolow 2013 ★★★★ ★★ ★★ 8
Alexander 2014 ★★★ ★★ ★★★ 8
Bohdan 2014 ★★★ ★★★ 7
Kourelis 2014 ★★★ ★★ ★★ 7
Lee 2014 ★★★★ ★★ 7
Zhang 2014 ★★★ ★★ 6
Steuer 2015 ★★★ ★★ 6
Walker 2016 ★★★★ ★★ ★★ 8
Li 2018 ★★★ ★★ ★★★ 8
Thomas 2018 ★★★ ★★ 6
Makoto 2019 ★★★ ★★ ★★ 7
Liu 2020 ★★★★ ★★ ★★ 8
Suzuki 2020 ★★★ ★★ 6
Wang 2020 ★★★★ ★★ ★★★ 9
Akhtar-Danesh 2021 ★★★★ ★★ ★★ 8
Dimakakos 2021 ★★★ ★★ ★★★ 8
Deschênes-Simard 2021 ★★★★ ★★ ★★★ 9
Takemoto 2021 ★★★★ ★★ ★★★ 9
Zhang 2021 ★★★★ ★★ ★★ 8
Blom 2004 ★★★ ★★ 7
Patel 2009 ★★★ ★★ 6
Buosi 2013 ★★★★ ★★ ★★ 8
Agzarian 2015 ★★★★ ★★ ★★★ 9
CASE CONTROL STUDIES
First author Year Selection Comparability Exposure Overall quality score
Wang 2015 ★★★ ★★ ★★ 7
Ma 2017 ★★★ ★★ 6
Shen 2017 ★★★★ ★★ ★★ 8
Fu 2019 ★★★ ★★ ★★★ 8
Cui 2021 ★★★★ ★★ ★★★ 9
Li 2020 ★★★★ ★★ ★★ 8

Risk of bias for included studies.

The rating criteria are as follows: ★ represents 1 score, ★★ represents 2 scores, ★★★ represents 3 scores, and ★★★★ represents 4 scores.

Prevalence of VTE in patients with lung cancer

Thirty-five studies (1347), 29 (82.86%) (13, 14, 1631, 33, 3537, 3942, 44, 45, 47) reported the prevalence of VTE among patients with lung cancer, ranging from 1% to 20%, with an estimated pooled prevalence of 7% (95% CI: 0.06–0.08; I2 = 98.5%), as shown in Figure 2. Owing to the significant heterogeneity between different study designs (I2 = 98.5%, P = 0.0002), a sensitivity analysis was performed by omitting each study individually to explore the sources of heterogeneity. The effect of lung cancer on the overall prevalence of VTE was relatively robust after removing three studies (16, 18, 28) with high risks of bias (Appendix 2). A funnel plot on this revealed significant publication bias (Figure 3). Publication bias was found to be high in this meta-analysis, as demonstrated by Egger’s regression tests (P=0.034). Using the clipping method, we found the adjusted prevalence of VTE in patients with lung cancer to be 5% (95% CI: 0.043–0.056, P < 0.001). This was not significantly different from the pre-adjusted prevalence of 7% (95% CI: 0.062–0.075, < 0.001), indicating the prevalence of VTE was not significantly affected by publication bias (Figure 4).

Figure 2

Figure 2

Forest plot showing the prevalence of VTE in patients with lung cancer.

Figure 3

Figure 3

Funnel figure demonstrating the prevalence of VTE in patients with lung cancer.

Figure 4

Figure 4

Clipped funnel plot demonstrating the prevalence of VTE in patients with lung cancer.

Sub-group analysis of VTE in patients with lung cancer

Of all included studies, 19 studies (14, 16, 17, 20, 2224, 26, 2830, 33, 3537, 41, 42, 44, 47) reported the prevalence of VTE by gender. The pooled prevalences of VTE in male and female patients were 3% (95% CI: 0.02–0.03; I2 = 95.5%) and 2% (95% CI: 0.02–0.03; I2 = 96.9%), respectively (Figures 5, 6). Eleven studies were performed in North America and Asia each, five were conducted in Europe and one in Australasia. The regional prevalence of VTE in patients with lung cancer was 7% (95% CI: 0.06–0.08; I2 = 99.2%) in North America (1519, 25, 28, 30, 35, 42, 44), 8% (95% CI: 0.06–0.10; I2 = 97.6%) in Asia (20, 26, 27, 29, 33, 36, 37, 3941, 47), 6% (95% CI: 0.04–0.09; I2 = 95.9%) in Europe (13, 22, 24, 31, 45) and 11% (95% CI: 0.07–0.15) in Australasia (23), respectively (Figure 7).

Figure 5

Figure 5

Forest plot demonstrating the VTE prevalence in male patients with lung cancer.

Figure 6

Figure 6

Forest plot demonstrating the VTE prevalence in female patients with lung cancer.

Figure 7

Figure 7

Forest plot demonstrating regional prevalence of VTE in patients with lung cancer.

Prevalence of DVT in patients with lung cancer

Twenty-four studies (1315, 1827, 29, 30, 33, 35, 38, 40, 4347) reported the prevalence of DVT in patients with primary lung cancer, which ranged from 1% to 29%. The pooled prevalence was 5% (95% CI: 0.04–0.06; I2 = 97.6%) (Figure 8). Four studies (15, 21, 27, 46) simultaneously reported the proportions of DVT grouped by gender, with the pooled prevalences in men and women being 7% (95% CI: 0.04–0.09; I2 = 81.9%) and 4% (95% CI: 0.02–0.05; I2 = 70.7%), respectively (Figures 9, 10).

Figure 8

Figure 8

Forest plot demonstrating DVT prevalence in lung cancer.

Figure 9

Figure 9

Forest plot demonstrating DVT prevalence in male patients with lung cancer.

Figure 10

Figure 10

Forest plot demonstrating DVT prevalence in female patients with lung cancer.

Prevalence of PE in patients with lung cancer

Twenty-four (13, 14, 1820, 2330, 3235, 38, 40, 4347) studies reported the prevalence of PE in patients with lung cancer, which ranged from 0% to 50%. The pooled prevalence was 3% (95% CI: 0.02–0.04; I2 = 99.4%) (Figure 11). Five studies (27, 32, 34, 38, 43) reported the prevalence of VTE in men and women, with the pooled prevalences being 13% (95% CI: 0.06–0.19; I2 = 96.6%) and 7% (95% CI: 0.04–0.10; I2 = 95.0%) in men and women, respectively (Figures 12, 13).

Figure 11

Figure 11

Forest plot demonstrating PE prevalence in lung cancer.

Figure 12

Figure 12

Forest plot demonstrating PE prevalence in male patients with lung cancer.

Figure 13

Figure 13

Forest plot demonstrating PE prevalence in female patients with lung cancer.

Prevalence of DVT and PE in patients with lung cancer

Seventeen studies (13, 14, 1820, 2327, 29, 30, 3335, 40, 47) reported the prevalence of the simultaneous occurrence of DVT and PE in lung cancer, ranging from 0% to 3%, with a pooled prevalence of 1% (95% CI: 0.01–0.01; I2 = 94.8%) (Figure 14).

Figure 14

Figure 14

Forest plot demonstrating DVT and PE prevalence in lung cancer.

Sites of occlusion of VTE in acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD)

Nine studies (14, 15, 23, 25, 27, 30, 41, 46, 47) reported on the specific sites of occlusion for VTE events, in which two (13, 33) reported that of both PE and DVT, whereas others (14, 15, 23, 25, 40, 41, 46) focused on either PE, DVT or VTE. Details on the sites of occlusion for the various VTE events are shown in Table 3.

Table 3

Author Year VTE Cases Location
Mason 2005 DVT 17 14 upper extremity, 15 lower extremity, and 4 central (iliac and vena cava) cases.
Tagalakis 2007 DVT 67 lower extremity, with 32 episodes limited to the distal leg veins and 35 involving the proximal leg veins
Alexander 2014 PE 16 8 proximal and 5 segmental
Lee 2014 VTE 131 Inferior or superior vena cava, neck vein, portal vein and other sites
Zhang 2014 DVT 56 distal leg vein, proximal leg vein
PE 47 segmental or subsegmental pulmonary artery, and above the segmental pulmonary artery
Suzuki 2020 DVT 14 the superior vena cava, jugular, subclavian, or great saphenous vein (10 had central type thrombosis, 6 had peripheral type lower limb vein thrombosis, 1 had great saphenous vein thrombosis (with concomitant PTE), 3 had superior vena cava thrombosis, 2 had subclavian vein thrombosis, and 1 had jugular vein thrombosis)
Wang 2020 VTE 77 73 patients with lower extremity muscular calf vein thrombosis and 4 patients with proximal DVT
Takemoto 2021 DVT 91 17 patients had proximal DVT (proximal alone, 10; proximal and distal, 7) and 74 patients (81.3%) had distal DVT alone. Regarding laterality, 46 patients had only left-sided DVT, 27 had only right-sided DVT, and 18 had bilateral DVT
Zhang 2021 DVT 86 Lower extremity and pelvis 85, and upper extremity and neck 1
PE 7 Segmental/subsegmental 6, and above segmental 1

Location characteristics of VTE included in the study.

Discussion

This systematic review included 35 studies with 742,156 individuals. It demonstrated that the number of patients with VTE, as previously reported, is substantial in those suffering from lung cancer, with gender and regional variances. In evaluating the prevalence and characteristics of all VTE, DVT, and PE, we found the prevalence of VTE was the highest in Australasia and lowest in Europe. The prevalence of VTE was higher in male patients with lung cancer. DVT predominantly occurred in the distal lower extremities, while PE mostly occurred in segmental or subsegmental pulmonary arteries. This systematic review summarized the prevalence of VTE in patients with lung cancer, which provides a theoretical basis in constructing guidelines for the screening, prevention and management of thromboembolism in lung cancer.

VTE is one of the most important comorbidities leading to increased morbidity and mortality in cancer patients (7). Approximately 15% of patients are diagnosed with at least one VTE event in the course of their cancer (48). Primary lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer death worldwide, which is further compounded by the high prevalence of VTE that both worsens the performance status of affected patients and complicates their cancer management. Understanding the characteristics of lung cancer-associated VTE is therefore of the utmost importance.

The association of race with VTE may reflect the different regional rates of VTE. It is widely understood that patients of Asian ethnicity have lower risks of VTE, where several ethnic comparative studies reported lower rates of thromboembolism affecting the venous system in patients of Asian descent in the United States when compared to Caucasians and African Americans (49). A study found at most a modest association of race with risk of VTE, particularly once comorbid conditions and socioeconomic status were accounted for in three large US cohort studies including 51,149 individuals and 916 VTE events. VTE rates were higher among black persons than white persons in the United States (risk ratio, 1.81; 95% confidence interval, 1.20–2.73) and significantly higher among black persons in the Southeast than black persons in the rest of the United States (risk ratio, 1.63; 95% confidence interval, 1.08–2.48), whereas they were not higher among white persons (risk ratio, 0.83; 95% confidence interval, 0.61–1.14) (50). A recent investigation found that the incidence of VTE varied across ethnic groups, with the highest incidence identified among African Americans (4.02%), followed by non-Hispanic Caucasians (2.98%), Hispanics (2.08%) and Chinese (0.79%) participants (51). The association between BMI and venous thromboembolism was strongest among non-White women with the higher incidence for obese compared with non-obese patients. Risk of venous thromboembolism increased with age for all race/ethnicities. Most of the above studies of geographic or racial incidence of VTE have used the Atherosclerosis Study Cohort, the Cardiovascular Health Study Cohort, and the Causes of Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke Study Cohort, among others. Fewer lung cancer study cohorts are currently available. We used the existing literature to summarize the geographic and racial incidence of VTE associated with lung cancer. Our meta-analysis found that the overall prevalence of VTE in patients with lung was 5%, with a male predominance. The incidence of VTE varied significantly across regions and appeared to be the highest in Australasia, though only one study from Australia was included. Patients in North America and Asia had similar incidences of VTE, while Europeans had the lowest incidence of VTE. Interestingly, previous studies have not shown these meaningful conclusions. Reasons for such potential differences between different ethnicities are unclear. A few potential confounding factors may be the varying risk factors occurring in patients of different ethnicities, with obesity, diabetes mellitus, and elevated factor VIII being more common in African Americans. Similarly, genetic polymorphisms, such as factor V Leiden and mutations in the prothrombin gene 20210A are more common in Caucasians (52), which may explain the high incidence of VTE in Australia, with Caucasians being the largest ethnicity in this study. These findings may promote widespread adoption of risk assessment tools, and target prophylactic anticoagulation. Regional differences suggest the need to adapt prevention strategies to local epidemiological data and to increase medical resources, such as specialized training, equipment, and anticoagulants, in high-risk areas. In addition, raising patients’ awareness of VTE risk can help improve adherence to preventive measures.

DVT and PE are the most common types of VTE, with PE closely associated and often occurring secondary to DVT. In our study, 17 studies reported a low combined prevalence of 1% of DVT and PE, which was consistent with previous reports. DVT mostly occurred in the distal lower extremities, while PE mostly occurred in segmental or subsegmental pulmonary arteries. In one of our studies (41), 28 of 1471 patients with lung cancer were diagnosed with VTE, including five patients with PE alone (0.34%), nine with PE diagnosed following DVT (0.61%), and 14 patients with DVT alone (0.95%). The incidence of PE occurring following diagnoses of DVT was 44.7%, and patients with risk factors accounted for 88.3%. The biggest risk factors for VTE were prolonged bed rest, surgery, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, malignancy, increased hemoglobin, heart disease, trauma, and femoral vein puncture. The number of risk factors increases with age and patient comorbidities. The most common clinical manifestations of DVT were lower limb swelling (91.3%) and pain (58.3%). The femoral vein is the most commonly involved site of occlusion for DVT in lung cancer, which also has the highest association with secondary PE. Therefore, for this group of high-risk patients, we need to closely monitor these risk factors, implement stratified management, and take appropriate preventive and therapeutic measures. This will help reduce the risk of DVT and PE, which are of critical clinical importance.

The incidence of DVT in cancer ranges from 1% to 11%, and is commonly indicative of poor prognosis (53). Among cancer patients presenting with DVT, cancers of the lung, prostate, breast, and colorectum are the most common, which comprise approximately 10% to 15% of all patients diagnosed with DVT (54). In our study, the prevalence of DVT was 5%, with a prevalence of 7% and 4% in men and women, respectively. The prevalence of DVT is higher in men, with male gender being an independent risk factor for DVT (17). As demonstrated in another study, the cumulative incidence of PE was 2.2% among 8014 patients with lung cancer (55). PE is associated with increased mortality in lung cancer (5). In a large registry study, 3% of deaths in cancer patients were PE-related, versus 1% of deaths in patients not suffering from cancers (56). In our study, the prevalence of PE was 3%, with a higher prevalence in men than in women similar to that for DVT, which were 13% and 7%, respectively. Being male is an independent risk factor for PE, which has been found consistently in a number of observational studies (57). Increased hemoglobin is a known risk factor for VTE, with generally higher hemoglobin levels in men potentially being one of the reasons why men are more likely to develop VTE. In summary, VTE, encompassing DVT and PE, is a critical complication in cancer patients, especially lung cancer patients. Therefore, close clinical monitoring, accurate risk assessment, and appropriate prophylactic measures need to be taken in such patients. In addition, gender and hemoglobin level, as important risk factors, should not be ignored in clinical management.

This study has a number of limitations that need to be acknowledged. Although the qualities of our included studies were examined using the NOS scale, with an average score of 7.486 being obtained, indicating a high overall quality, the use of ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes were only used in five studies for diagnosing VTE. As most of the other 30 studies combined medical history, physical examination and imaging, the inconsistency observed in diagnosing VTE between different studies may have introduced significant bias. In addition, some of the studies dated back to the mid-2000s. As such, the observed prevalence of VTE in patients with lung cancer may not apply to patients undergoing more up-to-date contemporary individualized treatments, including targeted therapy and immunotherapy from the early 2010s onwards. Additionally, since the literature we included did not provide sufficient data to support an analysis of the incidence of VTE associated with different types of lung cancer, we did not proceed with graphical representation or further analysis of this aspect.

In conclusion, our meta-analysis demonstrates that the prevalence of lung cancer-related VTE is high and is gender- and region-specific. This study emphasizes the need to further explore the causes of regional differences and develop effective preventive strategies, provides an important basis for improving the recognition and management of VTE in lung cancer patients, and may lead to changes in clinical practice to reduce the risk of this serious complication.

Limitations

In some of the literature we included, there may be instances where lung cancer patients have undergone surgery, radiotherapy, or chemotherapy, leading to a certain degree of heterogeneity in our analysis of the literature. Unfortunately, these studies did not provide sufficient data to allow for in-depth subgroup analysis, which is indeed regrettable. Therefore, risk factors related to VTE, such as surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy, were not systematically analyzed in this study.

Statements

Data availability statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/Supplementary Material. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding authors.

Author contributions

YX: Conceptualization, Data curation, Methodology, Software, Validation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. TW: Writing – review & editing. XR: Supervision, Writing – review & editing. JL: Writing – original draft. HZ: Supervision, Writing – review & editing. DY: Supervision, Writing – review & editing. YY: Conceptualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. DL: Conceptualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.

Funding

The author(s) declare financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. This study was supported by the funding program of Science and Technology Project of Liaoning Province (2023JH2/101700111).

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the authors of all studies included in this review who provided additional data. The corresponding author had full access to all the data in the study and took responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of our data analysis.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Supplementary material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fonc.2024.1405147/full#supplementary-material

References

  • 1

    Sung H Ferlay J Siegel RL Laversanne M Soerjomataram I Jemal A et al . Global cancer statistics 2020: globocan estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. (2021) 71:209–49. doi: 10.3322/caac.21660

  • 2

    Gervaso L Dave H Khorana AA . Venous and arterial thromboembolism in patients with cancer: jacc: cardiooncology state-of-the-art review. JACC CardioOncol. (2021) 3:173–90. doi: 10.1016/j.jaccao.2021.03.001

  • 3

    Streiff MB Holmstrom B Angelini D Ashrani A Elshoury A Fanikos J et al . Cancer-associated venous thromboembolic disease, version 2.2021, nccn clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. (2021) 19:1181–201. doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2021.0047

  • 4

    Ay C Ünal UK . Epidemiology and risk factors for venous thromboembolism in lung cancer. Curr Opin Oncol. (2016) 28:145–9. doi: 10.1097/CCO.0000000000000262

  • 5

    Howlett J Benzenine E Cottenet J Foucher P Fagnoni P Quantin C . Could venous thromboembolism and major bleeding be indicators of lung cancer mortality? A nationwide database study. BMC Cancer. (2020) 20:461. doi: 10.1186/s12885-020-06930-1

  • 6

    Sørensen HT Mellemkjaer L Olsen JH Baron JA . Prognosis of cancers associated with venous thromboembolism. N Engl J Med. (2000) 343:1846–50. doi: 10.1056/NEJM200012213432504

  • 7

    Giustozzi M Curcio A Weijs B Field TS Sudikas S Katholing A et al . Variation in the association between antineoplastic therapies and venous thromboembolism in patients with active cancer. Thromb Haemost. (2020) 120:847–56. doi: 10.1055/s-0040-1709527

  • 8

    Gangireddy C Rectenwald JR Upchurch GR Wakefield TW Khuri S Henderson WG et al . Risk factors and clinical impact of postoperative symptomatic venous thromboembolism. J Vasc Surg. (2007) 45:33541; discussion 41-2. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2006.10.034

  • 9

    Ay C Pabinger I Cohen AT . Cancer-associated venous thromboembolism: burden, mechanisms, and management. Thromb Haemost. (2017) 117:219–30. doi: 10.1160/TH16-08-0615

  • 10

    Page MJ McKenzie JE Bossuyt PM Boutron I Hoffmann TC Mulrow CD et al . The prisma 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Bmj. (2021) 372:n71. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71

  • 11

    Taylor KS Mahtani KR Aronson JK . Summarising good practice guidelines for data extraction for systematic reviews and meta-analysis. BMJ Evid Based Med. (2021) 26:8890. doi: 10.1136/bmjebm-2020-111651

  • 12

    Stang A . Critical evaluation of the newcastle-ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Eur J Epidemiol. (2010) 25:603–5. doi: 10.1007/s10654-010-9491-z

  • 13

    Nyaga VN Arbyn M Aerts M . Metaprop: A stata command to perform meta-analysis of binomial data. Arch Public Health. (2014) 72:39. doi: 10.1186/2049-3258-72-39

  • 14

    Blom JW Osanto S Rosendaal FR . The risk of a venous thrombotic event in lung cancer patients: higher risk for adenocarcinoma than squamous cell carcinoma. J Thromb Haemost. (2004) 2:1760–5. doi: 10.1111/j.1538-7836.2004.00928.x

  • 15

    Mason DP Quader MA Blackstone EH Rajeswaran J DeCamp MM Murthy SC et al . Thromboembolism after pneumonectomy for Malignancy: an independent marker of poor outcome. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. (2006) 131:711–8. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2005.10.027

  • 16

    Tagalakis V Levi D Agulnik JS Cohen V Kasymjanova G Small D . High risk of deep vein thrombosis in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: A cohort study of 493 patients. J Thorac Oncol. (2007) 2:729–34. doi: 10.1097/JTO.0b013e31811ea275

  • 17

    Chew HK Davies AM Wun T Harvey D Zhou H White RH . The incidence of venous thromboembolism among patients with primary lung cancer. J Thromb Haemost. (2008) 6:601–8. doi: 10.1111/j.1538-7836.2008.02908.x

  • 18

    Patel A Anraku M Darling GE Shepherd FA Pierre AF Waddell TK et al . Venous thromboembolism in patients receiving multimodality therapy for thoracic Malignancies. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. (2009) 138:843–8. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2009.02.028

  • 19

    Connolly GC Dalal M Lin J Khorana AA . Incidence and predictors of venous thromboembolism (Vte) among ambulatory patients with lung cancer. Lung Cancer. (2012) 78:253–8. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2012.09.007

  • 20

    Huang H Korn JR Mallick R Friedman M Nichols C Menzin J . Incidence of venous thromboembolism among chemotherapy-treated patients with lung cancer and its association with mortality: A retrospective database study. J Thromb Thrombolysis. (2012) 34:446–56. doi: 10.1007/s11239-012-0741-7

  • 21

    Yang Y Zhou Z Niu XM Li ZM Chen ZW Jian H et al . Clinical analysis of postoperative venous thromboembolism risk factors in lung cancer patients. J Surg Oncol. (2012) 106:736–41. doi: 10.1002/jso.23190

  • 22

    Buosi R Borra G Alabiso O Galetto A Pappagallo G Campanini M . Venous thromboembolism in non-small cell lung cancer patients: retrospective analysis of cases treated at the oncology day hospital of novara, Italy. Ital J Med. (2013) 2):113–7. doi: 10.4081/itjm.2013.113

  • 23

    Crolow C Samulowski M Blum T Kollmeier J Schönfeld N Bittner RC et al . Frequency of thromboembolic complications in patients with lung cancer. Pneumologie. (2013) 67:442–7. doi: 10.1055/s-0033-1344341

  • 24

    Alexander M Kirsa S Wolfe R MacManus M Ball D Solomon B et al . Thromboembolism in lung cancer - an area of urgent unmet need. Lung Cancer. (2014) 84:275–80. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2014.02.009

  • 25

    Kadlec B Skrickova J Merta Z Dusek L Jarkovsky J . The incidence and predictors of thromboembolic events in patients with lung cancer. ScientificWorldJournal. (2014) 2014:125706. doi: 10.1155/2014/125706

  • 26

    Kourelis TV Wysokinska EM Wang Y Yang P Mansfield AS Tafur AJ . Early venous thromboembolic events are associated with worse prognosis in patients with lung cancer. Lung Cancer. (2014) 86:358–62. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2014.10.003

  • 27

    Lee YG Kim I Lee E Bang SM Kang CH Kim YT et al . Risk factors and prognostic impact of venous thromboembolism in asian patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Thromb Haemost. (2014) 111:1112–20. doi: 10.1160/TH13-11-0956

  • 28

    Zhang Y Yang Y Chen W Guo L Liang L Zhai Z et al . Prevalence and associations of vte in patients with newly diagnosed lung cancer. Chest. (2014) 146:650–8. doi: 10.1378/chest.13-2379

  • 29

    Steuer CE Behera M Kim S Patel N Chen Z Pillai R et al . Predictors and outcomes of venous thromboembolism in hospitalized lung cancer patients: A nationwide inpatient sample database analysis. Lung Cancer. (2015) 88:80–4. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2015.01.022

  • 30

    Wang Z Yan HH Yang JJ Wang BC Chen HJ Zhou Q et al . Venous thromboembolism risk factors in chinese non-small cell lung cancer patients. Support Care Cancer. (2015) 23:635–41. doi: 10.1007/s00520-014-2405-y

  • 31

    Agzarian J Hanna WC Schneider L Schieman C Finley CJ Peysakhovich Y et al . Postdischarge venous thromboembolic complications following pulmonary oncologic resection: an underdetected problem. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. (2016) 151:992–9. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2015.11.038

  • 32

    Walker AJ Baldwin DR Card TR Powell HA Hubbard RB Grainge MJ . Risk of venous thromboembolism in people with lung cancer: A cohort study using linked uk healthcare data. Br J Cancer. (2016) 115:115–21. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2016.143

  • 33

    Ma L Wen Z . Risk factors and prognosis of pulmonary embolism in patients with lung cancer. Med (Baltimore). (2017) 96:e6638. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000006638

  • 34

    Shen Q Dong X Tang X Zhou J . Risk factors and prognosis value of venous thromboembolism in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer: A case-control study. J Thorac Dis. (2017) 9:5068–74. doi: 10.21037/jtd.2017.11.116

  • 35

    Li YP Shen L Huang W Hu XF Xie D Yang J et al . Prevalence and risk factors of acute pulmonary embolism in patients with lung cancer surgery. Semin Thromb Hemost. (2018) 44:334–40. doi: 10.1055/s-0037-1612625

  • 36

    Thomas DC Arnold BN Hoag JR Salazar MC Detterbeck FC Boffa DJ et al . Timing and risk factors associated with venous thromboembolism after lung cancer resection. Ann Thorac Surg. (2018) 105:1469–75. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2018.01.072

  • 37

    Fu X Ping L Ye G . Analysis of the risk factors of peripherally inserted central catheter-associated venous thrombosis after chemotherapy in patients with lung cancer. Int J Clin Exp Med. (2019) 12:5852–9.

  • 38

    Hiraide M Shiga T Minowa Y Nakano Y Yoshioka H Suzuki K et al . Identification of risk factors for venous thromboembolism and evaluation of khorana venous thromboembolism risk assessment in Japanese lung cancer patients. J Cardiol. (2020) 75:110–4. doi: 10.1016/j.jjcc.2019.06.013

  • 39

    Junjun L Pei W Ying Y Kui S . Prognosis and risk factors in older patients with lung cancer and pulmonary embolism: A propensity score matching analysis. Sci Rep. (2020) 10:1272. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-58345-4

  • 40

    Ke L Cui S Chen S Hu B Li H . Dynamics of D-dimer in non-small cell lung cancer patients receiving radical surgery and its association with postoperative venous thromboembolism. Thorac Cancer. (2020) 11:2483–92. doi: 10.1111/1759-7714.13559

  • 41

    Suzuki T Fujino S Inaba S Yamamura R Katoh H Noji Y et al . Venous thromboembolism in patents with lung cancer. Clin Appl Thromb Hemost. (2020) 26:1076029620977910. doi: 10.1177/1076029620977910

  • 42

    Wang P Zhao H Zhao Q Ren F Liu H Chen G et al . Risk factors and clinical significance of D-dimer in the development of postoperative venous thrombosis in patients with lung tumor. Cancer Manag Res. (2020) 12:5169–79. doi: 10.2147/CMAR.S256484

  • 43

    Akhtar-Danesh GG Akhtar-Danesh N Shargall Y . Venous thromboembolism in surgical lung cancer patients: A provincial population-based study. Ann Thorac Surg. (2022) 114:890–7. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2021.10.018

  • 44

    Cui YQ Tan XM Liu B Zheng Y Zhang LY Chen ZA et al . Analysis on risk factors of lung cancer complicated with pulmonary embolism. Clin Respir J. (2021) 15:6573. doi: 10.1111/crj.13270

  • 45

    Deschênes-Simard X Richard C Galland L Blais F Desilets A Malo J et al . Venous thrombotic events in patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors for non-small cell lung cancer: A retrospective multicentric cohort study. Thromb Res. (2021) 205:2939. doi: 10.1016/j.thromres.2021.06.018

  • 46

    Dimakakos E Livanios K Vathiotis I Gomatou G Gkiozos I Kotteas E et al . Risk factors for venous thromboembolism in patients with small cell lung cancer. Anticancer Res. (2021) 41:1523–8. doi: 10.21873/anticanres.14911

  • 47

    Takemoto T Soh J Ohara S Fujino T Koga T Nishino M et al . The prevalence and risk factors associated with preoperative deep venous thrombosis in lung cancer surgery. Surg Today. (2021) 51:1480–7. doi: 10.1007/s00595-021-02243-3

  • 48

    Eichinger S . Cancer associated thrombosis: risk factors and outcomes. Thromb Res. (2016) 140 Suppl 1:S12–7. doi: 10.1016/S0049-3848(16)30092-5

  • 49

    White RH . The epidemiology of venous thromboembolism. Circulation. (2003) 107:I4–8. doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000078468.11849.66

  • 50

    Zakai NA McClure LA Judd SE Safford MM Folsom AR Lutsey PL et al . Racial and regional differences in venous thromboembolism in the United States in 3 cohorts. Circulation. (2014) 129:1502–9. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.113.006472

  • 51

    Weze KO Obisesan OH Dardari ZA Cainzos-Achirica M Dzaye O Graham G et al . The interplay of race/ethnicity and obesity on the incidence of venous thromboembolism. Am J Prev Med. (2022) 63:e11–20. doi: 10.1016/j.amepre.2021.12.023

  • 52

    Zakai NA McClure LA . Racial differences in venous thromboembolism. J Thromb Haemost. (2011) 9:1877–82. doi: 10.1111/j.1538-7836.2011.04443.x

  • 53

    Falanga A Russo L Milesi V Vignoli A . Mechanisms and risk factors of thrombosis in cancer. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. (2017) 118:7983. doi: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2017.08.003

  • 54

    Heit JA O’Fallon WM Petterson TM Lohse CM Silverstein MD Mohr DN et al . Relative impact of risk factors for deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism: A population-based study. Arch Intern Med. (2002) 162:1245–8. doi: 10.1001/archinte.162.11.1245

  • 55

    Sun JM Kim TS Lee J Park YH Ahn JS Kim H et al . Unsuspected pulmonary emboli in lung cancer patients: the impact on survival and the significance of anticoagulation therapy. Lung Cancer. (2010) 69:330–6. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2009.11.015

  • 56

    Gussoni G Frasson S La Regina M Di Micco P Monreal M . Three-month mortality rate and clinical predictors in patients with venous thromboembolism and cancer. Findings from the riete registry. Thromb Res. (2013) 131:2430. doi: 10.1016/j.thromres.2012.10.007

  • 57

    Olié V Fuhrman C Chin F Lamarche-Vadel A Scarabin PY de Peretti C . Time trends in pulmonary embolism mortality in France, 2000-2010. Thromb Res. (2015) 135:334–8. doi: 10.1016/j.thromres.2014.12.002

Summary

Keywords

lung cancer, venous thromboembolism, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, meta-analysis

Citation

Xu Y, Wu T, Ren X, Liu J, Zhang H, Yang D, Yan Y and Lv D (2024) Prevalence and clinical characteristics of venous thromboembolism in patients with lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front. Oncol. 14:1405147. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1405147

Received

22 March 2024

Accepted

23 July 2024

Published

14 August 2024

Volume

14 - 2024

Edited by

Carmine Siniscalchi, University of Parma, Italy

Reviewed by

Elisa Roca, Casa di cura Pederzoli, Italy

Serafeim Chlapoutakis, Hospital Agios Savvas, Greece

Updates

Copyright

*Correspondence: Ying Yan, ; Dongyang Lv,

†These authors have contributed equally to this work and share first authorship

Disclaimer

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Outline

Figures

Cite article

Copy to clipboard


Export citation file


Share article

Article metrics