Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

D-Dimer test in cancer patients with suspected acute pulmonary embolism.
J Thromb Haemost. 2005 Jun; 3(6):1239-42.JT

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The safety of a D-dimer (DD) measurement in cancer patients with clinically suspected pulmonary embolism (PE) is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of the DD test in consecutive patients with clinically suspected PE with and without cancer.

METHODS

The diagnostic accuracy of DD (Tinaquant D-dimer) was first retrospectively assessed in an unselected group of patients referred for suspected PE (n = 350). Subsequently, the predictive value of the DD was validated in a group of consecutive inpatients and outpatients with clinically suspected PE prospectively enrolled in a management study (n = 519). The results of the DD test in cancer patients were assessed according to the final diagnosis of PE and the 3-month clinical follow-up.

RESULTS

In the first study group, DD showed a sensitivity and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 100% and 100% in patients with cancer and 97% and 98% in those without malignancy, respectively. In the validation cohort, the sensitivity and NPV of DD were both 100% (95% CI 82%-100% and 72%-100%, respectively), whereas in patients without malignancy, the corresponding estimates were 93% (95% CI 87%-98%) and 97% (95% CI, 95%-99%), respectively. The specificity of DD was low in patients with (21%) and without cancer (53%).

CONCLUSIONS

A negative DD result safely excludes the diagnosis of PE in patients with cancer. Because of the low specificity, when testing 100 patients with suspected PE, a normal DD concentration safely excludes PE in 15 patients with cancer and in 43 patients without cancer.

Links

Publisher Full Text
Aggregator Full Text

Authors+Show Affiliations

Di Nisio M
Department of Medicine and Aging, School of Medicine, and Aging Research Center, Ce.S.I., Gabriele D'Annunzio University Foundation, Chieti-Pescara, Italy. m.dinisio@amc.uva.nl
Sohne M
No affiliation info available
Kamphuisen PW
No affiliation info available
Büller HR
No affiliation info available

MeSH

Acute DiseaseCase-Control StudiesDiagnostic ErrorsFemaleFibrin Fibrinogen Degradation ProductsHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsPredictive Value of TestsProspective StudiesPulmonary EmbolismSensitivity and Specificity

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article
Validation Study

Language

eng

PubMed ID

15946214

Citation

Di Nisio, M, et al. "D-Dimer Test in Cancer Patients With Suspected Acute Pulmonary Embolism." Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis : JTH, vol. 3, no. 6, 2005, pp. 1239-42.
Di Nisio M, Sohne M, Kamphuisen PW, et al. D-Dimer test in cancer patients with suspected acute pulmonary embolism. J Thromb Haemost. 2005;3(6):1239-42.
Di Nisio, M., Sohne, M., Kamphuisen, P. W., & Büller, H. R. (2005). D-Dimer test in cancer patients with suspected acute pulmonary embolism. Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis : JTH, 3(6), 1239-42.
Di Nisio M, et al. D-Dimer Test in Cancer Patients With Suspected Acute Pulmonary Embolism. J Thromb Haemost. 2005;3(6):1239-42. PubMed PMID: 15946214.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - D-Dimer test in cancer patients with suspected acute pulmonary embolism. AU - Di Nisio,M, AU - Sohne,M, AU - Kamphuisen,P W, AU - Büller,H R, PY - 2005/6/11/pubmed PY - 2005/9/24/medline PY - 2005/6/11/entrez SP - 1239 EP - 42 JF - Journal of thrombosis and haemostasis : JTH JO - J Thromb Haemost VL - 3 IS - 6 N2 - BACKGROUND: The safety of a D-dimer (DD) measurement in cancer patients with clinically suspected pulmonary embolism (PE) is unclear. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of the DD test in consecutive patients with clinically suspected PE with and without cancer. METHODS: The diagnostic accuracy of DD (Tinaquant D-dimer) was first retrospectively assessed in an unselected group of patients referred for suspected PE (n = 350). Subsequently, the predictive value of the DD was validated in a group of consecutive inpatients and outpatients with clinically suspected PE prospectively enrolled in a management study (n = 519). The results of the DD test in cancer patients were assessed according to the final diagnosis of PE and the 3-month clinical follow-up. RESULTS: In the first study group, DD showed a sensitivity and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 100% and 100% in patients with cancer and 97% and 98% in those without malignancy, respectively. In the validation cohort, the sensitivity and NPV of DD were both 100% (95% CI 82%-100% and 72%-100%, respectively), whereas in patients without malignancy, the corresponding estimates were 93% (95% CI 87%-98%) and 97% (95% CI, 95%-99%), respectively. The specificity of DD was low in patients with (21%) and without cancer (53%). CONCLUSIONS: A negative DD result safely excludes the diagnosis of PE in patients with cancer. Because of the low specificity, when testing 100 patients with suspected PE, a normal DD concentration safely excludes PE in 15 patients with cancer and in 43 patients without cancer. SN - 1538-7933 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/15946214/D_Dimer_test_in_cancer_patients_with_suspected_acute_pulmonary_embolism_ L2 - https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1538-7836.2005.01323.x DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -