Cochrane · systematic review · CD010837
Effect of testing for cancer on cancer‐ or venous thromboembolism (VTE)‐related mortality and morbidity in people with unprovoked VTE
Robertson, L, Broderick, C, Yeoh, SE, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2021 · Cochrane Library
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
16
current version
GRADE rated
10
No studies
4
Included studies
NR
No studies 4 · 25%Ungraded 2 · 12.5%Very low 0 · 0%Low 6 · 37.5%Moderate 4 · 25%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Current version onlyExtensive tests versus tests at the physician's discretion
Population: people with unprovoked VTE
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
All‐cause mortality1 Extensive tests vs tests at the physician's discretion | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Cancer‐related mortality2 Extensive tests vs tests at the physician's discretion | OR 0.49 [0.15, 1.67] | 2 studies · 396 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
VTE‐related mortality4 Extensive tests vs tests at the physician's discretion | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
VTE‐related morbidity5 Extensive tests vs tests at the physician's discretion | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Stage of cancer ‐ early6 Extensive tests vs tests at the physician's discretion | OR 5 [1.05, 23.76] | 1 study · 201 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Stage of cancer ‐ advanced8 Extensive tests vs tests at the physician's discretion | OR 0.25 [0.03, 2.28] | 1 study · 201 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Time to cancer diagnosis9 Extensive tests vs tests at the physician's discretion | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 201 participants | Ungraded |
Frequency of underlying cancer diagnosis10 Extensive tests vs tests at the physician's discretion | OR 1.32 [0.59, 2.93] | 2 studies · 396 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning versus standard testing alone
Population: people with unprovoked VTE
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
All‐cause mortality1 Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning vs standard testing alone | OR 1.22 [0.49, 3.04] | 2 studies · 1248 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Cancer‐related mortality3 Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning vs standard testing alone | OR 0.55 [0.2, 1.52] | 2 studies · 1248 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
VTE‐related mortality4 Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning vs standard testing alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
VTE‐related morbidity5 Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning vs standard testing alone | OR 1.02 [0.48, 2.17] | 1 study · 854 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Stage of cancer ‐ early Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning vs standard testing alone | OR 1.78 [0.51, 6.17] | 1 study · 394 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Stage of cancer ‐ advanced Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning vs standard testing alone | OR 1 [0.14, 7.17] | 1 study · 394 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Time to cancer diagnosis7 Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning vs standard testing alone | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 854 participants | Ungraded |
Frequency of an underlying cancer diagnosis8 Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning vs standard testing alone | OR 1.71 [0.91, 3.2] | 2 studies · 1248 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Extensive tests versus tests at the physician's discretion
Population: people with unprovoked VTE
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
All‐cause mortality1 Extensive tests vs tests at the physician's discretion | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Cancer‐related mortality2 Extensive tests vs tests at the physician's discretion | OR 0.49 [0.15, 1.67] | 2 studies · 396 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
VTE‐related mortality4 Extensive tests vs tests at the physician's discretion | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
VTE‐related morbidity5 Extensive tests vs tests at the physician's discretion | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Stage of cancer ‐ early6 Extensive tests vs tests at the physician's discretion | OR 5 [1.05, 23.76] | 1 study · 201 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Stage of cancer ‐ advanced8 Extensive tests vs tests at the physician's discretion | OR 0.25 [0.03, 2.28] | 1 study · 201 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Time to cancer diagnosis9 Extensive tests vs tests at the physician's discretion | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 201 participants | Ungraded |
Frequency of underlying cancer diagnosis10 Extensive tests vs tests at the physician's discretion | OR 1.32 [0.59, 2.93] | 2 studies · 396 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning versus standard testing alone
Population: people with unprovoked VTE
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
All‐cause mortality1 Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning vs standard testing alone | OR 1.22 [0.49, 3.04] | 2 studies · 1248 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Cancer‐related mortality3 Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning vs standard testing alone | OR 0.55 [0.2, 1.52] | 2 studies · 1248 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
VTE‐related mortality4 Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning vs standard testing alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
VTE‐related morbidity5 Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning vs standard testing alone | OR 1.02 [0.48, 2.17] | 1 study · 854 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Stage of cancer ‐ early Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning vs standard testing alone | OR 1.78 [0.51, 6.17] | 1 study · 394 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Stage of cancer ‐ advanced Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning vs standard testing alone | OR 1 [0.14, 7.17] | 1 study · 394 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Time to cancer diagnosis7 Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning vs standard testing alone | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 854 participants | Ungraded |
Frequency of an underlying cancer diagnosis8 Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning vs standard testing alone | OR 1.71 [0.91, 3.2] | 2 studies · 1248 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Extensive tests versus tests at the physician's discretion
Population: people with unprovoked VTE
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
All‐cause mortality1 Extensive tests vs tests at the physician's discretion | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Cancer‐related mortality2 Extensive tests vs tests at the physician's discretion | OR 0.49 [0.15, 1.67] | 2 studies · 396 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
VTE‐related mortality4 Extensive tests vs tests at the physician's discretion | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
VTE‐related morbidity5 Extensive tests vs tests at the physician's discretion | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Stage of cancer ‐ early6 Extensive tests vs tests at the physician's discretion | OR 5 [1.05, 23.76] | 1 study · 201 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Stage of cancer ‐ advanced8 Extensive tests vs tests at the physician's discretion | OR 0.25 [0.03, 2.28] | 1 study · 201 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Time to cancer diagnosis9 Extensive tests vs tests at the physician's discretion | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 201 participants | Ungraded |
Frequency of underlying cancer diagnosis10 Extensive tests vs tests at the physician's discretion | OR 1.32 [0.59, 2.93] | 2 studies · 396 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning versus standard testing alone
Population: people with unprovoked VTE
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
All‐cause mortality1 Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning vs standard testing alone | OR 1.22 [0.49, 3.04] | 2 studies · 1248 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Cancer‐related mortality3 Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning vs standard testing alone | OR 0.55 [0.2, 1.52] | 2 studies · 1248 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
VTE‐related mortality4 Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning vs standard testing alone | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
VTE‐related morbidity5 Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning vs standard testing alone | OR 1.02 [0.48, 2.17] | 1 study · 854 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Stage of cancer ‐ early Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning vs standard testing alone | OR 1.78 [0.51, 6.17] | 1 study · 394 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Stage of cancer ‐ advanced Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning vs standard testing alone | OR 1 [0.14, 7.17] | 1 study · 394 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Time to cancer diagnosis7 Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning vs standard testing alone | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 854 participants | Ungraded |
Frequency of an underlying cancer diagnosis8 Standard testing plus PET/CT scanning vs standard testing alone | OR 1.71 [0.91, 3.2] | 2 studies · 1248 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |