Download PDF
Thromb Haemost 2020; 120(05): 805-814
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1708877
Stroke, Systemic or Venous Thromboembolism
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Development of Sex-Stratified Prediction Models for Recurrent Venous Thromboembolism: A Danish Nationwide Cohort Study

Ida Ehlers Albertsen 
1   Department of Cardiology, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark
2   Aalborg Thrombosis Research Unit, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark
,
Mette Søgaard
1   Department of Cardiology, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark
2   Aalborg Thrombosis Research Unit, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark
,
Samuel Zachary Goldhaber
3   Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
,
Gregory Piazza
3   Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States
,
Flemming Skjøth
2   Aalborg Thrombosis Research Unit, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark
4   Unit of Clinical Biostatistics, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark
,
Thure Filskov Overvad 
2   Aalborg Thrombosis Research Unit, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark
,
Torben Bjerregaard Larsen
1   Department of Cardiology, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark
2   Aalborg Thrombosis Research Unit, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark
,
Peter Brønnum Nielsen
1   Department of Cardiology, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark
2   Aalborg Thrombosis Research Unit, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark
› Author Affiliations Funding The Obel Family Foundation partly funded this research by an unrestricted grant. The sponsor had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the paper for publication.
Further Information

Publication History

12 December 2019

13 February 2020

Publication Date:
05 May 2020 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective To optimize decision making for anticoagulant treatment duration after incident venous thromboembolism, we derived and internally validated two clinically applicable sex-specific prediction models for venous thromboembolism recurrence, discarding the traditional categorization of provoked and unprovoked venous thromboembolism.

Methods This study was based on data from Danish nationwide registries. We identified all routine care in- and outpatients with completed anticoagulant treatment for incident venous thromboembolism from 2012 through 2017. The outcome was recurrent venous thromboembolism within 2 years. Risk scores were derived using Cox regression analysis and a backward selection process on a set of 24 potential predictors. Performance was assessed through calibration and discrimination using bootstrap techniques to internally validate the scores.

Results The study included 11,519 patients. Risk scores under the joint acronym AIM-SHA-RP were developed. Age, Incident pulmonary embolism, and recent Major surgery were predictors for both sexes; Statin treatment, Heart disease and Antiplatelet treatment were predictors specifically for men, while chronic Renal disease and recent Pneumonia or sepsis were predictors specifically for women. The risk scores were well calibrated and identified a low- (< 5%), intermediate- (5–10%), and high-risk (> 10%) group for both sexes. Generally, discriminative capacities, as measured by the c-statistic, were limited.

Conclusion We developed two clinically applicable risk scores to estimate the risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism after completed anticoagulant treatment. The risk scores can potentially guide treatment duration of anticoagulation after incident venous thromboembolism but require further external validation before implemented in clinical practice.

Keywords

venous thromboembolism - recurrence - unprovoked - provoked - risk stratification

Supplementary Material

Comment to this article:

Refining Risk Prediction for Recurrent Venous Thromboembolism: Can We Do Better?Thromb Haemost 2020; 120(05): 725-727
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1709686

 

  • References

  • 1 Prandoni P, Noventa F, Ghirarduzzi A. , et al. The risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism after discontinuing anticoagulation in patients with acute proximal deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism. A prospective cohort study in 1,626 patients. Haematologica 2007; 92 (02) 199-205
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Albertsen IE, Nielsen PB, Søgaard M. , et al. Venous thromboembolism and risk of recurrence: a Danish nationwide cohort study. Am J Med 2018; 131 (09) 1067-1074
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Søgaard KK, Schmidt M, Pedersen L, Horváth-Puhó E, Sørensen HT. 30-year mortality after venous thromboembolism: a population-based cohort study. Circulation 2014; 130 (10) 829-836
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Raskob GE, Angchaisuksiri P, Blanco AN. , et al; ISTH Steering Committee for World Thrombosis Day. Thrombosis: a major contributor to global disease burden. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2014; 34 (11) 2363-2371
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Kearon C, Akl EA, Ornelas J. , et al. Antithrombotic therapy for VTE disease: CHEST guideline and expert panel report. Chest 2016; 149 (02) 315-352
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Konstantinides SV, Torbicki A, Agnelli G. , et al; Task Force for the Diagnosis and Management of Acute Pulmonary Embolism of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). 2014 ESC guidelines on the diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism. Eur Heart J 2014; 35 (43) 3033-3069 , 3069a–3069k
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Weitz JI, Lensing AWA, Prins MH. , et al; EINSTEIN CHOICE Investigators. Rivaroxaban or aspirin for extended treatment of venous thromboembolism. N Engl J Med 2017; 376 (13) 1211-1222
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Prins MH, Lensing AWA, Prandoni P. , et al. Risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism according to baseline risk factor profiles. Blood Adv 2018; 2 (07) 788-796
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Rodger MA, Kahn SR, Wells PS. , et al. Identifying unprovoked thromboembolism patients at low risk for recurrence who can discontinue anticoagulant therapy. CMAJ 2008; 179 (05) 417-426
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Eichinger S, Heinze G, Jandeck LM, Kyrle PA. Risk assessment of recurrence in patients with unprovoked deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism: the Vienna prediction model. Circulation 2010; 121 (14) 1630-1636
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Tosetto A, Iorio A, Marcucci M. , et al. Predicting disease recurrence in patients with previous unprovoked venous thromboembolism: a proposed prediction score (DASH). J Thromb Haemost 2012; 10 (06) 1019-1025
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Franco Moreno AI, García Navarro MJ, Ortiz Sánchez J. , et al. A risk score for prediction of recurrence in patients with unprovoked venous thromboembolism (DAMOVES). Eur J Intern Med 2016; 29: 59-64
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Timp JF, Braekkan SK, Lijfering WM. , et al. Prediction of recurrent venous thrombosis in all patients with a first venous thrombotic event: the Leiden Thrombosis Recurrence Risk Prediction model (L-TRRiP). PLoS Med 2019; 16 (10) e1002883
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Rodger MA, Le Gal G, Anderson DR. , et al; REVERSE II Study Investigators. Validating the HERDOO2 rule to guide treatment duration for women with unprovoked venous thrombosis: multinational prospective cohort management study. BMJ 2017; 356: j1065
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Marcucci M, Iorio A, Douketis JD. , et al. Risk of recurrence after a first unprovoked venous thromboembolism: external validation of the Vienna Prediction Model with pooled individual patient data. J Thromb Haemost 2015; 13 (05) 775-781
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Tosetto A, Testa S, Martinelli I. , et al. External validation of the DASH prediction rule: a retrospective cohort study. J Thromb Haemost 2017; 15 (10) 1963-1970
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Franco Moreno AI, García Navarro MJ, Ortiz Sánchez J, Ruiz Giardín JM. Predicting recurrence after a first unprovoked venous thromboembolism: retrospective validation of the DAMOVES score. Eur J Intern Med 2017; 41: e15-e16
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Albertsen IE, Piazza G, Goldhaber SZ. Let's stop dichotomizing venous thromboembolism as provoked or unprovoked. Circulation 2018; 138 (23) 2591-2593
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 McRae S, Tran H, Schulman S, Ginsberg J, Kearon C. Effect of patient's sex on risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism: a meta-analysis. Lancet 2006; 368 (9533): 371-378
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Goldhaber SZ. Risk factors for venous thromboembolism. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010; 56 (01) 1-7
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Schmidt M, Pedersen L, Sørensen HT. The Danish Civil Registration System as a tool in epidemiology. Eur J Epidemiol 2014; 29 (08) 541-549
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Lynge E, Sandegaard JL, Rebolj M. The Danish National Patient Register. Scand J Public Health 2011; 39 (07) 30-33
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Kildemoes HW, Sørensen HT, Hallas J. The Danish National Prescription Registry. Scand J Public Health 2011; 39 (07) 38-41
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Schmidt M, Cannegieter SC, Johannesdottir SA, Dekkers OM, Horváth-Puhó E, Sørensen HT. Statin use and venous thromboembolism recurrence: a combined nationwide cohort and nested case-control study. J Thromb Haemost 2014; 12 (08) 1207-1215
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Severinsen MT, Kristensen SR, Overvad K, Dethlefsen C, Tjønneland A, Johnsen SP. Venous thromboembolism discharge diagnoses in the Danish National Patient Registry should be used with caution. J Clin Epidemiol 2010; 63 (02) 223-228
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Sundbøll J, Adelborg K, Munch T. , et al. Positive predictive value of cardiovascular diagnoses in the Danish National Patient Registry: a validation study. BMJ Open 2016; 6 (11) e012832
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Kearon C, Iorio A, Palareti G. ; Subcommittee on Control of Anticoagulation of the SSC of the ISTH. Risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism after stopping treatment in cohort studies: recommendation for acceptable rates and standardized reporting. J Thromb Haemost 2010; 8 (10) 2313-2315
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Kearon C, Ageno W, Cannegieter SC, Cosmi B, Geersing GJ, Kyrle PA. ; Subcommittees on Control of Anticoagulation, and Predictive and Diagnostic Variables in Thrombotic Disease. Categorization of patients as having provoked or unprovoked venous thromboembolism: guidance from the SSC of ISTH. J Thromb Haemost 2016; 14 (07) 1480-1483
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Kahn SR, Lim W, Dunn AS. , et al. Prevention of VTE in nonsurgical patients: Antithrombotic Therapy and Prevention of Thrombosis, 9th ed: American College of Chest Physicians Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines. Chest 2012. 141(2 Suppl): e195S-e226S
  • 30 Konstantinides SV, Meyer G, Becattini C. , et al. ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of acute pulmonary embolism developed in collaboration with the European Respiratory Society (ERS). Eur Heart J 2020; 41 (04) 543-603
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Collins GS, Reitsma JB, Altman DG, Moons KGM. ; Members of the TRIPOD group. Transparent Reporting of a Multivariable Prediction Model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD Statement. Eur Urol 2015; 67 (06) 1142-1151
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Austin PC, Lee DS, Fine JP. Introduction to the analysis of survival data in the presence of competing risks. Circulation 2016; 133 (06) 601-609
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Cook NR. . Use and Misuse of the Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve in Risk Prediction Special Report; 2007 . Doi: DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.672402
    PubMed
  • 34 van Diepen M, Ramspek CL, Jager KJ, Zoccali C, Dekker FW. Prediction versus aetiology: common pitfalls and how to avoid them. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2017; 32 (February): (Suppl. 02) ii1-ii5
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Hellfritzsch M, Husted SE, Grove EL. , et al. Treatment changes among users of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in atrial fibrillation. Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol 2017; 120 (02) 187-194
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Wallace R, Anderson M-A, See K, Gorelik A, Irving L, Manser R. Venous thromboembolism management practices and knowledge of guidelines: a survey of Australian haematologists and respiratory physicians. Intern Med J 2017; 47 (04) 436-446
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Münster A-MB, Grove EL, Kjærgaard J. , et al. Behandlingsvejledning | Lungeemboli og dyb venetrombose. Available at: https://www.nbv.cardio.dk/lungeemboli#tabel12_3 . Accessed September 5, 2018
    PubMed
  • 38 Newson R. Comparing the predictive powers of survival models using Harrell's C or Somers' D. Stata J 2010; 10 (03) 339-358
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Harrell Jr FE, Lee KL, Mark DB. Multivariable prognostic models: issues in developing models, evaluating assumptions and adequacy, and measuring and reducing errors. Stat Med 1996; 15 (04) 361-387
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar