Table 2.
Summary of findings: Heparin versus no heparin be used in patients with cancer who have no other therapeutic or prophylactic indication for anticoagulation.
| Patient or population: Patients with cancer who have no other therapeutic or prophylactic indication for anticoagulation Intervention: LMWH Comparison: No LMWH | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Outcomes | Illustrative comparative risksa (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | No. of participants (studies) | Quality of the evidence (GRADE) | |
| Assumed risk No LMWH |
Corresponding risk LMWH |
||||
|
| |||||
| Mortality at 12 mo Follow-up: 12 mo |
459 per 1000 | 436 per 1000 (409–459) | RR 0.95 (0.89–1) | 7266 (13 studies) | Moderate |
| Symptomatic VTE | 51 per 1000 | 29 per 1000 (22–38) | RR 0.56 (0.43–0.74) | 6998 (12 studies) | High |
| Major bleeding | 16 per 1000 | 18 per 1000 (13–26) | RR 1.14 (0.8–1.63) | 7539 (14 studies) | Moderate |
| Minor bleeding | 28 per 1000 | 31 per 1000 (25–44) | RR 1.1 (0.89–1.55) | 7041 (12 studies) | High |
CI, Confidence interval; LMWH, low molecular weight heparin; RR, risk ratio; VTE, venous thromboembolism; GRADE, Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation.
a
The corresponding risk (and its 95% CI) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).