Safety of endoscopy in cancer patients on antiangiogenic agents: A retrospective multicenter outcomes study
PLoS ONE, ISSN: 1932-6203, Vol: 12, Issue: 5, Page: e0176899
2017
- 1Citations
- 10Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations1
- Citation Indexes1
- Captures10
- Readers10
- 10
Article Description
Background/Aims The use of antiangiogenic agents (AAs) in cancer treatment has increased because they offer survival benefit in combination with cytotoxic chemotherapy. Given their potential to cause gastrointestinal (GI) perforation and bleeding, it is currently recommended that AAs be held for 28 days before and after surgery. However, there are no specific guidelines which address their use around endoscopic procedures because data regarding the safety of endoscopy in cancer patients while on AAs is scarce despite the fact that these patients often require endoscopy. This study investigated the safety of endoscopy in cancer patients receiving AAs. Methods This is a retrospective multicenter study of a consecutive case series of 445 cancer patients undergoing endoscopy within 31 days of administration of AAs at 5 specialized cancer centers between April 2008 and August 2014. Endoscopies were classified into two different categories based on the risk of GI bleeding and perforation: low and high. The primary outcome measures were procedure-related adverse events (AEs) and death within 30 days of endoscopy. The severity of AEs was classified according to the common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE) version 4.0. The incidence of AEs and mortality was calculated using the total number of patients as the denominator. Results 445 cancer patients with a mean age of 54 years underwent a total of 545 endoscopies. Median time duration from AAs to endoscopy was 11 days. Of 545 endoscopic procedures, 398 (73%) were low-risk and 147 (27%) were high-risk. There were 3 procedure-related AEs: Esophageal perforation (grade 3) two days after an EGD, pancreatitis (grade 5) a day after failed ERCP, and bleeding from the gastrostomy site (grade 1) two days after an EGD. Of 445 patients, 29 (6.5%) died within 30 days of the procedure with no deaths deemed procedure-related. The most common causes of death were terminal cancer (n = 10), hepatic decompensation (n = 5) and sepsis (n = 4). Conclusion In this retrospective study, the rate of endoscopy-related AEs in patients on AAs appears to be low when performed in specialized cancer centers. However, future prospective studies are needed to confirm this finding.
Bibliographic Details
10.1371/journal.pone.0176899; 10.1371/journal.pone.0176899.t004; 10.1371/journal.pone.0176899.t001; 10.1371/journal.pone.0176899.t003; 10.1371/journal.pone.0176899.t002
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85019153502&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176899; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28472195; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176899.t004; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176899.t004; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176899.t001; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176899.t001; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176899.t003; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176899.t003; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176899; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176899.t002; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176899.t002; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176899.t004; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0176899.t004; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176899.t001; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0176899.t001; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176899; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0176899; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176899.t002; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0176899.t002; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176899.t003; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0176899.t003; http://www.plosone.org/article/metrics/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0176899; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0176899&type=printable; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0176899; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176899.t004; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0176899.t003; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0176899.t001; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176899.t003; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176899; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0176899&type=printable; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176899.t002; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176899.t001; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0176899; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0176899.t004; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0176899.t002
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know