Publication:
Response.

dc.contributor.authorJara-Palomares, Luis
dc.contributor.authorOtero, Remedios
dc.contributor.authorJimenez, David
dc.contributor.authorPraena-Fernandez, Juan Manuel
dc.contributor.authorElias-Hernandez, Teresa
dc.contributor.authorMonreal, Manuel
dc.date.accessioned2023-01-25T09:43:56Z
dc.date.available2023-01-25T09:43:56Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.description.abstractWe thank Drs Ferreyro et al for their interest in our article, their insightful comments, and the opportunity to reply. Ferreyro et al published a prognostic score with a final sample of 540 patients with VTE in 2013. Of these patients, 349 (two-thirds) composed the derivation cohort and 191 patients the validation cohort.1 In the derivation cohort, there were 32 cancers (9.2%) diagnosed during 1 year of follow-up. Moreover, they included a secondary analysis evaluating a combined outcome of cancer or death to address the possibility that death might occur before the identification of an occult cancer. In our opinion, this analysis should be taken with caution, because it is very difficult to assume that all deaths are secondary to occult cancer. In our study, 444 patients (7.6%; 95% CI, 6.90-8.28) were diagnosed with cancer beyond the first 30 days with a follow-up 2 years.2 One of the major differences with the study by Ferreyro et al is the sample size. As we know, the choice of an adequate sample size for a Cox regression analysis is generally based on the rule of thumb derived from simulation studies of a minimum of 10 events per variable.3 In the multivariate model, the authors included 3 variables, obtaining for previous VTE ß: 64 (95 CI%, 7.07-579).1 This large CI suggests that these data are not robust, mostly resulting from few events.
dc.description.versionSi
dc.identifier.citationJara-Palomares L, Otero R, Jimenez D, Praena-Fernandez JM, Elias-Hernandez T, Monreal M. Response. Chest. 2017 Mar;151(3):728-729.
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.chest.2016.11.038
dc.identifier.essn1931-3543
dc.identifier.pmid28279282
dc.identifier.unpaywallURLhttp://journal.chestnet.org/article/S0012369216625667/pdf
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10668/10951
dc.issue.number3
dc.journal.titleChest
dc.journal.titleabbreviationChest
dc.language.isoen
dc.organizationFundación Pública Andaluza para la Gestión de la Investigación en Salud de Sevilla-FISEVI
dc.organizationInstituto de Biomedicina de Sevilla-IBIS
dc.organizationHospital Universitario Virgen del Rocío
dc.page.number728-729
dc.provenanceRealizada la curación de contenido 08/07/2025.
dc.publisherAmerican College of Chest Physicians
dc.pubmedtypeLetter
dc.pubmedtypeComment
dc.relation.publisherversionhttps://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0012-3692(16)62566-7
dc.rights.accessRightsRestricted Access
dc.subjectVenous thromboembolism
dc.subjectCancer
dc.subjectPrognosis
dc.subjectRisk score
dc.subjectCohort study
dc.subjectCox regression analysis
dc.subject.decsTromboembolismo venoso
dc.subject.decsCáncer
dc.subject.decsPronóstico
dc.subject.decsPuntuación de riesgo
dc.subject.decsEstudio de cohorte
dc.subject.decsRegresión de Cox
dc.subject.meshHumans
dc.subject.meshNeoplasms
dc.subject.meshPrognosis
dc.subject.meshPredictive Value of Tests
dc.subject.meshCohort Studies
dc.subject.meshSurvival Analysis
dc.titleResponse.
dc.typeletter
dc.type.hasVersionVoR
dc.volume.number151
dspace.entity.typePublication

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
RISalud_Accesorestringido.pdf
Size:
93.39 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format