BACKGROUND<p style="text-align: justify;" data-mce-style="text-align: justify;">Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in hospitalized cancer patients. The Khorana and Padua risk scores are widely used tools for predicting VTE, but their comparative performance in hospitalized cancer patients has not been fully assessed. This study aims to evaluate the predictive performance of these two risk assessment models in predicting VTE in hospitalized patients with malignancy.p>METHODS<p style="text-align: justify;" data-mce-style="text-align: justify;">This cross-sectional study was conducted at a tertiary hospital between January 2022 and December 2023. A total of 200 hospitalized patients with malignancy were enrolled. Their baseline demographics, medical history and diagnostic data were collected. Patients were stratified into risk categories using the Khorana and Padua models, and their predictive abilities were assessed through sensitivity, specificity and area under the curve (AUC) analyses. The diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) was confirmed with evidence of an intraluminal deep venous filling defect on CT or catheter venography, or a deep vein thrombus identified by color Doppler. Pulmonary embolism (PE) was diagnosed by pulmonary angiography showing an intraluminal filling defect of the pulmonary artery visualized through computed tomography pulmonary angiography or magnetic resonance imaging.p>RESULTS<p style="text-align: justify;" data-mce-style="text-align: justify;">The Khorana score demonstrated a sensitivity of 83.3%, specificity of 77.5% and an AUC of 0.81. The Padua score showed a sensitivity of 76.7%, specificity of 85.5% and an AUC of 0.79. Both models showed good predictive accuracy. However, the Khorana score having a high sensitivity makes it suitable for identifying high-risk patients, while the Padua score having a high specificity makes it better at ruling out low-risk patients.p>CONCLUSION<p style="text-align: justify;" data-mce-style="text-align: justify;">Both the Khorana and Padua scores are valuable tools for predicting VTE in hospitalized cancer patients, but the Khorana score may be more effective for cancer-specific risk stratification. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.p>
Human ; Male ; Female ; Morbidity ; Neoplasms ; Thromboembolism ; Venous Thromboembolism

BACKGROUND<p style="text-align: justify;" data-mce-style="text-align: justify;">Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in hospitalized cancer patients. The Khorana and Padua risk scores are widely used tools for predicting VTE, but their comparative performance in hospitalized cancer patients has not been fully assessed. This study aims to evaluate the predictive performance of these two risk assessment models in predicting VTE in hospitalized patients with malignancy.p>METHODS<p style="text-align: justify;" data-mce-style="text-align: justify;">This cross-sectional study was conducted at a tertiary hospital between January 2022 and December 2023. A total of 200 hospitalized patients with malignancy were enrolled. Their baseline demographics, medical history and diagnostic data were collected. Patients were stratified into risk categories using the Khorana and Padua models, and their predictive abilities were assessed through sensitivity, specificity and area under the curve (AUC) analyses. The diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) was confirmed with evidence of an intraluminal deep venous filling defect on CT or catheter venography, or a deep vein thrombus identified by color Doppler. Pulmonary embolism (PE) was diagnosed by pulmonary angiography showing an intraluminal filling defect of the pulmonary artery visualized through computed tomography pulmonary angiography or magnetic resonance imaging.p>RESULTS<p style="text-align: justify;" data-mce-style="text-align: justify;">The Khorana score demonstrated a sensitivity of 83.3%, specificity of 77.5% and an AUC of 0.81. The Padua score showed a sensitivity of 76.7%, specificity of 85.5% and an AUC of 0.79. Both models showed good predictive accuracy. However, the Khorana score having a high sensitivity makes it suitable for identifying high-risk patients, while the Padua score having a high specificity makes it better at ruling out low-risk patients.p>CONCLUSION<p style="text-align: justify;" data-mce-style="text-align: justify;">Both the Khorana and Padua scores are valuable tools for predicting VTE in hospitalized cancer patients, but the Khorana score may be more effective for cancer-specific risk stratification. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.p>
Human ; Male ; Female ; Morbidity ; Neoplasms ; Thromboembolism ; Venous Thromboembolism