Impact of Venous Thrombosis Prevention in Ambulatory Oncology: Importance of Guideline Adherence

PURPOSE: Despite strong evidence and guidelines supporting prophylactic anticoagulation for ambulatory patients with cancer starting systemic cancer-directed therapy who are at high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), uptake in practice is limited. We evaluated the real-world impact of prophylactic anticoagulation in such patients receiving guideline-based care. METHODS: We conducted an observational cohort study of patients assessed as part of a multidisciplinary VTE prevention program (the Vermont model) from 2016 to 2021. For this study, we included outpatients at high risk of VTE based on a Khorana risk score or Protecht risk score of ≥3. Based on the individualized decision making, patients either received or did not receive prophylactic anticoagulation. The primary outcome was VTE at 6 months after risk assessment. The secondary outcome was all-cause mortality at 6 months. RESULTS: Of 573 high-risk patients assessed during the study period, 340 (59%) received thromboprophylaxis and 233 (41%) did not. Eleven (3.2%) on thromboprophylaxis developed a VTE within 6 months, compared with 18 (7.7%) not on thromboprophylaxis. After adjusting for age, sex, BMI, cancer stage, chemotherapy, immunotherapy, distance from center, and history of VTE, thromboprophylaxis reduced VTE (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.36 [95% CI, 0.16 to 0.80]) compared with no thromboprophylaxis. Of deaths within 6 months, 57 (16.8%) occurred in the thromboprophylaxis group versus 73 (31.3%) in the no thromboprophylaxis group (adjusted OR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.30 to 0.71]). CONCLUSION: Ambulatory patients with cancer at high risk of VTE who received prophylactic anticoagulation had improved clinical outcomes with fewer VTE events and less mortality. Our real-world data support available clinical trial data and underscore the importance of the provision of guideline-directed care in the cancer outpatient setting.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
JCO Oncology Practice
Published
2026-04-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1200/op-25-01211
Primary Topic
Venous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Impact of Venous Thrombosis Prevention in Ambulatory Oncology: Importance of Guideline Adherence

Peter Callas, Chris E. Holmes, Emily Parenteau, Karlyn A. Martin et al.
JCO Oncology Practice
Venous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
article

Impact of Venous Thrombosis Prevention in Ambulatory Oncology: Importance of Guideline Adherence

Peter Callas, Chris E. Holmes, Emily Parenteau, Karlyn A. Martin, Karen Libby, Steven Ades, Jacob Barker, Mary Cushman, Derek Devine
article en

Abstract

PURPOSE: Despite strong evidence and guidelines supporting prophylactic anticoagulation for ambulatory patients with cancer starting systemic cancer-directed therapy who are at high risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), uptake in practice is limited. We evaluated the real-world impact of prophylactic anticoagulation in such patients receiving guideline-based care. METHODS: We conducted an observational cohort study of patients assessed as part of a multidisciplinary VTE prevention program (the Vermont model) from 2016 to 2021. For this study, we included outpatients at high risk of VTE based on a Khorana risk score or Protecht risk score of ≥3. Based on the individualized decision making, patients either received or did not receive prophylactic anticoagulation. The primary outcome was VTE at 6 months after risk assessment. The secondary outcome was all-cause mortality at 6 months. RESULTS: Of 573 high-risk patients assessed during the study period, 340 (59%) received thromboprophylaxis and 233 (41%) did not. Eleven (3.2%) on thromboprophylaxis developed a VTE within 6 months, compared with 18 (7.7%) not on thromboprophylaxis. After adjusting for age, sex, BMI, cancer stage, chemotherapy, immunotherapy, distance from center, and history of VTE, thromboprophylaxis reduced VTE (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.36 [95% CI, 0.16 to 0.80]) compared with no thromboprophylaxis. Of deaths within 6 months, 57 (16.8%) occurred in the thromboprophylaxis group versus 73 (31.3%) in the no thromboprophylaxis group (adjusted OR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.30 to 0.71]). CONCLUSION: Ambulatory patients with cancer at high risk of VTE who received prophylactic anticoagulation had improved clinical outcomes with fewer VTE events and less mortality. Our real-world data support available clinical trial data and underscore the importance of the provision of guideline-directed care in the cancer outpatient setting.

JCO Oncology Practice
University of Vermont (US), University of Vermont Medical Center (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 33%
Venous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.