1. Introduction
Compared to the general population, individuals with cancer are at 4 to 7 times higher risk of developing a venous thromboembolism (VTE) [ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 ]. Malignancy induces a prothrombotic state which includes activation of the coagulation cascade, increase in pro-inflammatory cytokines, as well as inhibition of natural anticoagulants and is further exacerbated by cancer treatment and surgery [ 5 , 6 , 7 ]. Other risk factors for VTE in cancer include the site and stage of the tumor, older age, prior history of clots, and comorbidities [ 6 , 8 , 9 , 10 ]. Although at an already increased risk of death from cancer, VTE carries a substantial risk of mortality with clotting events accounting for up to 10% of all deaths in patients with cancer [ 11 , 12 , 13 ].
Multiple myeloma (MM) has one of the highest risks of thrombosis among all cancers due to disease-related pathological changes and treatment [ 7 , 14 ]. Thalidomide and lenalidomide (IMIDs) are well known to be associated with increased risk of thrombosis [ 15 ], especially when combined with high-dose steroids and other chemotherapy, with incidence approaching 25% in some studies [ 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 ]. Other common MM treatments include proteasome inhibitors (PIs; bortezomib, carfilzomib) and cytotoxic therapies (cyclophosphamide, melphalan, others), which have been shown to have a lower, though still increased, risk of VTE compared to IMIDs [ 20 ]. Other disease-related factors with potential to increase thrombotic risk include use of central venous catheters (CVC), erythropoietin agents, hospitalization, and infection [ 6 , 10 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 ]. Due to this inherent increased risk of thrombosis with MM, guidelines U.S. guidelines recommend routine thromboprophylaxis with low-molecular weight heparins (LMWH) or aspirin [ 27 , 28 ].
These previous studies have assessed VTE risk in MM during randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) comparing alternative treatment strategies or in small observational utilizing “traditional” Kaplan–Meier and/or Cox proportional hazard models. In these statistical frameworks, death is considered a censoring event. This violates a basic assumption that censoring events and the outcome of interest must be independent of each other, meaning that censoring is uninformative. However, given that the occurrence of death prevents the outcome from ever occurring, death competes with the outcome and should not be considered a censoring event [ 29 ]. Instead, a competing risks framework should be used which treats death as a separate outcome. A study by Ay et al. [ 29 ] compared traditional methods to competing risk methods and found significant bias when ignoring death as a competing risk with VTE incidence during cancer. They observed that the bias in the cumulative incidence of thromboembolism is a function of the incidence of the competing risk. This study did not look at individual factors that may be associated with thromboembolism and how estimates of relative association may be impacted by these methods.
The objective of this study was to determine the one-year incidence of thrombotic events in MM and to assess the association of baseline characteristics and thrombosis in these patients while comparing traditional time-to-event methods with competing risk methods. This study compared risk associations between the two statistical frameworks as applied to this specific cancer type and calculated the bias that would be observed with “traditional” methods.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Data Source
This was a retrospective cohort study utilizing Truven Health Analytics MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters and Medicare Supplemental databases during the years 2008–2013. The MarketScan data are administrative claims data including medical diagnostic and procedural billing information and pharmacy fill records for those with commercial insurance linked to demographic and insurance enrollment information for each individual. The data include information regarding medical encounters for nearly 40 million persons each year and are representative of the commercially insured population in the U.S.
2.2. Patient Inclusion
We included patients with at least two separate claims with a diagnosis of MM (ICD-9: 203.0x) at least 14 days apart. For further inclusion, subjects were required to have a minimum of 6 months of continuous medical and pharmacy insurance coverage prior to the first MM diagnosis and be at least 18 years or older at diagnosis. Subjects also could not have a previous diagnosis of another cancer or a thrombotic outcome event during the 6-month, pre-index period.
2.3. Subject Characteristics
Age was assessed on the MM index date and gender was linked from the enrollment file. The Charlson Comorbidity Index was used to assess comorbidity burden based on the ICD-9-CM coding algorithm [ 30 ] and the total score was further categorized by 0, 1–2, 3–4, and 5+ groups with individual comorbidities also reported. Additional comorbidities of interest were also assessed during the 6 month pre-index period, including thrombocytosis (ICD-9: 238.71, 289.9), leukocytosis (ICD-9: 288.5), anemia (ICD-9: 280.x–285.x), obesity (ICD-9: 278.01–278.03, V85.3, V85.4), hypocoagulopathies (ICD-9: 286.x) hypercoagulopathies (ICD-9: 289.81–289.82), thrombocytopenia (ICD-9: 238.71, 289.9), and leukopenia (ICD-9: 288.5x).
2.4. Outcome Events
DVT and PE events were assessed based on previously published ICD-9-CM algorithms [ 31 , 32 , 33 ]. PVT was identified by ICD-9-CM code 452.x and AT identified by ICD-9-CM code 444.x. Date of death was based on discharge status codes on hospital or hospice records and loss to follow-up occurred when continuous insurance coverage ended during the follow-up period or follow-up terminated at the end of the data (December 2013). All other individuals were censored after one year of follow-up. If a thrombosis occurred on the same day as death, the event was recorded as the thrombosis as it was the main outcome of interest in this study. Subjects were followed until one of the following occurred: (1) a thrombosis event; (2) death; (3) loss to follow-up; or (4) end of the 1 year study period.
2.5. Survival Analysis
Person time was calculated correcting for the differential follow-up of each subject. The incidence rate of thrombosis was reported as the rate per 1000 person-years. The association of thrombosis with baseline demographic and clinical characteristics at diagnosis was assessed using a competing risks regression model. In this model the dependent outcome has three levels, 0 = censored, 1 = thrombosis, and 2 = death. Subdistribution hazard ratios (HR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association between each baseline covariate and thrombotic events were estimated for each baseline covariate included in the model. For demonstration of the selection of statistical methods, a Cox proportional hazard (PH) model was also constructed wherein death was considered a censoring event and not a competing risk and included the same specification as the competing risks model. Bias of the Cox PH model HRs was calculated as the relative difference between the Cox HR and the competing risk HR and is reported as the percent bias. The one-year cumulative incidence of thrombotic events was reported for the total cohort by the Fine and Gray method for competing risks. One minus the Kaplan–Meier estimate was used to plot the cumulative probability of thromboembolism, ignoring the competing risk of death. All analyses were conducted using SAS version 9.4 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA). The University of Kentucky Institutional Review Board approved the use of the data for this study.
3. Results
3.1. Incidence of Thrombosis
There were 1050 thrombosis events observed in 13,700 individuals during the one-year follow-up. This included 756 DVTs (72% of events), 238 PEs (22.7%), 51 ATs (4.9%), and 5 PVTs (0.5%). Nearly one-half ( N = 520, 49.5% of events) occurred within the first 90 days after MM diagnosis. Table 1 includes the demographics and clinical characteristics of the cohort.
The cohort contributed 9791.4 person-years of follow-up time for a one-year incidence rate of thrombosis of 107.2 (95% CI, 100.0–113.9) events per 1000 person-years. The highest incidence of thrombosis was in the first 30 days, with 251 events and an incidence rate of 234.2 (95% CI, 206.5–264.5) per 1000 person-years. The rate of thrombotic events decreased over the 60, 90, and 180 day intervals: 196.6 (95% CI, 178.3–216.4), 171.7 (95% CI, 157.4–187.0), 140.1 (95% CI, 130.5–150.1), per 1000 person-years, respectively, There were 384 deaths experienced as a competing risk and a total of 479 deaths during the study period with an incidence rate of 48.9 (95% CI, 44.7–53.5) deaths per 1000 person-years. The one-year cumulative incidence of thrombosis was 9.2% (95% CI, 8.7%–9.7%) for the total cohort ( Figure 1 ) in the competing risk framework. Additionally, Figure 1 shows that the Kaplan–Meier method overestimates the cumulative incidence, which underlies the statistical models.
3.2. Survival Model Results
Table 2 demonstrates the bias introduced by using Cox PH models in the presence of competing risks. The highest bias can be observed in factors that would hypothetically be more associated with the omitted competing risk such as severe comorbidities and increasing age. For example, if competing risks are omitted, a much stronger association is observed between the 75+ age group and VTE, which represents a 75% bias over the competing risks estimate. Older age was associated with an increase in the hazard of thrombosis for the 35–64 and 65–74 age groups compared to the 18–34 reference group ( Table 2 ). Female gender showed a protective effect with HR = 0.7 (95% CI, 0.7–0.8) compared to males. Increasing comorbidity burden had no impact on the hazard of thrombosis at baseline; however, some individual comorbidities at baseline did increase the risk. Those with CHF had 70% higher hazard (HR = 1.7 (95% CI, 1.4–2.1)) and those with hypertension had 20% higher hazard (HR = 1.2 (95% CI, 1.0–1.3)). Diagnosis with both leukocytosis (HR = 1.3 (95% CI, 1.0–1.9)) and leukopenia (HR = 1.6 (95% CI, 1.1–2.2)) had increased hazard of thrombosis in this population. There were no other significant associations observed for the other included covariates.
4. Discussion
Treatment advances over the last decade for MM have led to an increase in median survival greater than 5 years [ 34 , 35 ]. However, thrombotic complications have emerged as serious adverse effects of treatment driving the consideration of thromboprophylaxis in guidelines and RCTs in this patient population [ 36 , 37 ]. Despite the known risk, the pathogenesis of thrombosis in MM is poorly understood due to the various factors that can impart risk including patient characteristics, disease-related factors, as well as treatment-related risks [ 7 ]. Although thrombotic events have not been shown to have a large impact on overall survival specifically in MM [ 36 ], thrombosis events can cause interruption in therapy as well as tremendous economic and humanistic burdens in the MM population [ 38 , 39 ]. Recent American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines have called for better evidence regarding the increased risk of thrombosis and MM so that prevention efforts can be focused towards periods of highest risk [ 40 ].
This study investigated two statistical approaches to assess the baseline factors related to thrombosis risk in newly diagnosed MM. For this population the competing risk of death is a contribution by many factors, including the advanced age of the cohort, having cancer, as well as the risk of death from the other outcome events [ 30 ]. The primary model used a competing risks framework, given that the outcome events cannot be considered independent of each other, i.e. experiencing one may preclude experiencing another or one event may cause another. Failure to do so can overestimate survival for traditional Kaplan–Meier or proportional hazard based analyses and lead to inflated cumulative incidence functions and biased associations [ 30 ]. In this study, this would have overestimated the cumulative incidence to be nearly 12% over the one-year study period. For measures of association in the regression models, the largest bias was observed for those factors that would be more highly associated with the competing risk. For example, age 75 and older had a HR of 2.8 (95% CI 1.6–4.8) in the Cox PH model. This is compared to the “true” value from the competing risk model of 1.6 (0.9–2.7)—a relative bias of 75%. Likewise, there was significant bias associated with liver disease (54.5%), dementia (25.0%), peptic ulcer disease (25.0%), and chronic pulmonary disease (25.0%). More importantly, as in the case of increasing age and peripheral vascular disease, the bias alters the bounds of the confidence interval to include the null making the interpretation of the findings more tedious.
In the primary analysis, there were few baseline factors found to be associated with risk in this study suggesting that risk may be associated with factors related to treatment of MM instead of pre-existing, patient-related factors. We observed that nearly one-half of all thrombotic events occurred within the first 90 days after MM diagnosis. A similar finding has been found by other studies, suggesting that the risk in the initial stage of diagnosis and treatment may be related to high tumor burden and release of thrombogenic factors with initiation of treatment [ 16 , 41 , 42 ]. This underscores the need to identify early risk factors at diagnosis to guide the utilization of thromboprophylaxis—especially in the first 90 days of treatment. In a post - hoc analysis restricting events to the first 90 days and in the full model analysis presented here, however, we found few demographic or clinical characteristics that were predictive of outcome events. This suggests that thrombosis risk in this population may be primarily driven by treatment and not necessarily any underlying risk.
Due to the methodological focus and goals of this study, we ignored other factors related to VTE risk in multiple myeloma—mainly chemotherapeutic agents used and utilization of anticoagulant/antiplatelet therapy. It is well known that IMID therapy is associated with a large increase in risk and has led to thromboprophylaxis being commonplace for these patients. Treatment is, by nature, highly time-variant, given ever-changing treatment regimens as well as periods of treatment interspersed with periods of no treatment. This implies the usefulness of time-varying statistical frameworks and represents one of the primary limitations of competing risks analyses, given that competing risks methods are not compatible with time-varying covariates. While it is beyond the scope of this study to address time-varying exposures, we have shown the bias introduced when ignoring competing risks. Thus, there is a tenuous balance between including biased estimates of the survival functions or excluding time-varying covariates. Other methodologies can be utilized as well, such as the case-crossover or case-time-control study designs which avoid these setbacks. This study is subject to several limitations inherent to claims-based studies [ 43 , 44 ]. This study relied on ICD-9 coding available in the claims to diagnose study subjects with outcome events and comorbidities. It is impossible to confirm a positive diagnosis using these data; however, claims-based coding algorithms for VTE have been shown to perform strongly especially when there is a high risk of VTE in the population [ 32 , 45 ]. Further, information regarding MM severity and staging is not available in claims data and, thus, could not be included here. Likewise, medications not obtained using insurance, such as over-the-counter aspirin for thromboprophylaxis, cannot be observed in claims data and was unobserved in this study [ 46 ].
5. Conclusions
This study used a competing risks framework given that the outcome events cannot be considered independent of each other, i.e. , experiencing one may preclude experiencing another or one event may cause another. Failure to do so can overestimate survival for traditional Kaplan–Meier or proportional hazard based analyses and lead to inflated cumulative incidence functions and biased associations. In this study, this would have overestimated the cumulative incidence to be nearly 12% over the one-year study period. For this population the competing risk of death is a contribution by many factors including the advanced age of the cohort, having cancer, as well as the risk of death from the other outcome events. Death must be accounted for in older populations as well as in high mortality disease states when the incidence of death is high to avoid potential statistical pitfalls of traditional Kaplan–Meier and Cox PH methods.
Acknowledgments
The project described was supported by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institutes of Health, through grant number UL1TR000117. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH.
Author Contributions
Joshua D. Brown contributed to the study design, data analysis, interpretation of the results, and the drafting and revision of the manuscript. Val R. Adams contributed to the study design, interpretation of the results, and the editing and revision of the manuscript.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Abbreviations
The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
venous thromboembolism
multiple myeloma
immunomodulating drugs
proteasome inhibitors
central venous catheters
low-molecular weight heparin
randomized controlled trial
International classification of diseases, 9th revision, clinical modification
deep vein thrombosis
pulmonary embolism
hazard ratio
proportional hazard
confidence interval
portal vein thrombosis
arterial thrombosis
standard deviation
References
1. Timp J.F. Braekkan S.K. Versteeg H.H. Cannegieter S.C. Epidemiology of cancer-associated venous thrombosis Blood 2013 122 1712 1723 10.1182/blood-2013-04-460121 23908465
2. Blom J.W. Doggen C.J. Osanto S. Rosendaal F.R. Malignancies, prothrombotic mutations, and the risk of venous thrombosis JAMA 2005 293 715 722 10.1001/jama.293.6.715 15701913
3. Cronin-Fenton D.P. Sondergaard F. Pedersen L.A. Fryzek J.P. Cetin K. Acquavella J. Baron J.A. Sørensen H.T. Hospitalisation for venous thromboembolism in cancer patients and the general population: A population-based cohort study in Denmark, 1997–2006 Br. J. Cancer 2010 103 947 953 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605883 20842120 PMC2965880
4. Heit J.A. Silverstein M.D. Mohr D.N. Petterson T.M. O’Fallon W.M. Melton L.J. Risk factors for deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism: A population-based case-control study Arch. Intern. Med. 2000 160 809 815 10.1001/archinte.160.6.809 10737280
5. Lip G.Y. Chin B.S. Blann A.D. Cancer and the prothrombotic state Lancet Oncol. 2002 3 27 34 10.1016/S1470-2045(01)00619-2 11908507
6. Khorana A.A. Dalal M. Lin J. Connolly G.C. Incidence and predictors of venous thromboembolism (VTE) among ambulatory high-risk cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy in the United States Cancer 2013 119 648 655 10.1002/cncr.27772 22893596
7. Zamagni E. Brioli A. Tacchetti P. Zannetti B. Pantani L. Cavo M. Multiple myeloma, venous thromboembolism, and treatment-related risk of thrombosis Semin. Thromb. Hemost. 2011 37 209 219 10.1055/s-0031-1273085 21455855
8. Horsted F. West J. Grainge M.J. Risk of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis PLoS Med. 2012 9 16 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001275 22859911 PMC3409130
9. Khorana A.A. Kuderer N.M. Culakova E. Lyman G.H. Francis C.W. Development and validation of a predictive model for chemotherapy-associated thrombosis Blood 2008 111 4902 4907 10.1182/blood-2007-10-116327 18216292 PMC2384124
10. Wun T. White R.H. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with cancer: Epidemiology and risk factors Cancer Investig. 2009 27 63 74 10.1080/07357900802656681 19291526
11. Frere C. Debourdeau P. Hij A. Cajfinger F. Onan M.N. Panicot-Dubois L. Dubois C. Farge D. Therapy for cancer-related thromboembolism Semin. Oncol. 2014 41 319 338 10.1053/j.seminoncol.2014.04.005 25023348
12. Khorana A.A. Francis C.W. Culakova E. Kuderer N.M. Lyman G.H. Thromboembolism is a leading cause of death in cancer patients receiving outpatient chemotherapy J. Thromb. Haemost. 2007 5 632 634 10.1111/j.1538-7836.2007.02374.x 17319909
13. Khorana A.A. Venous thromboembolism and prognosis in cancer Thromb. Res. 2010 125 490 493 10.1016/j.thromres.2009.12.023 20097409 PMC2878879
14. Srkalovic G. Cameron M.G. Rybicki L. Deitcher S.R. Kattke-Marchant K. Hussein M.A. Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance and multiple myeloma are associated with an increased incidence of venothromboembolic disease Cancer 2004 101 558 566 10.1002/cncr.20405 15274069
15. Zangari M. Anaissie E. Barlogie B. Badros A. Desikan R. Gopal A.V. Morris C. Toor A. Siegel E. Fink L. Increased risk of deep-vein thrombosis in patients with multiple myeloma receiving thalidomide and chemotherapy Blood 2001 98 1614 1615 10.1182/blood.V98.5.1614 11520815
16. Zangari M. Siegel E. Barlogie B. Anaissie E. Saghafifar F. Fassas A. Morris C. Fink L. Tricot G. Thrombogenic activity of doxorubicin in myeloma patients receiving thalidomide: Implications for therapy Blood 2002 100 1168 1171 10.1182/blood-2002-01-0335 12149193
17. Bennett C.L. Angelotta C. Yarnold P.R. Evens A.M. Zonder J.A. Raisch D.W. Richardson P. Thalidomide- and lenalidomide-associated thromboembolism among patients with cancer JAMA 2006 296 2558 2560 10.1001/jama.296.21.2558-c 17148721
18. Leleu X. Rodon P. Hulin C. Daley L. Dauriac C. Hacini M. Decaux O. Eisemann J.C. Fitoussi O. Lioure B. MELISSE, a large multicentric observational study to determine risk factors of venous thromboembolism in patients with multiple myeloma treated with immunomodulatory drugs Thromb. Haemost. 2013 110 844 851 10.1160/TH13-02-0140 23903204
19. Carrier M. Le Gal G. Tay J. Wu C. Lee A.Y. Rates of venous thromboembolism in multiple myeloma patients undergoing immunomodulatory therapy with thalidomide or lenalidomide: A systematic review and meta-analysis J. Thromb. Haemost. 2011 9 653 663 10.1111/j.1538-7836.2011.04215.x 21255254
20. Zangari M. Fink L. Zhan F. Tricot G. Low venous thromboembolic risk with bortezomib in multiple myeloma and potential protective effect with thalidomide/lenalidomide-based therapy: Review of data from phase 3 trials and studies of novel combination regimens Clin. Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2011 11 228 236 10.1016/j.clml.2011.03.006 21575928
21. Bennett C.L. Silver S.M. Djulbegovic B. Samaras A.T. Blau C.A. Gleason K.J. Barnato S.E. Elverman K.M. Courtney D.M. McKoy J.M. Venous thromboembolism and mortality associated with recombinant erythropoietin and darbepoetin administration for the treatment of cancer-associated anemia JAMA 2008 299 914 924 10.1001/jama.299.8.914 18314434
22. Khorana A.A. Francis C.W. Culakova E. Lyman G.H. Risk factors for chemotherapy-associated venous thromboembolism in a prospective observational study Cancer 2005 104 2822 2829 10.1002/cncr.21496 16284987
23. Lippi G. Franchini M. Favaloro E.J. Thrombotic complications of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents Semin. Thromb. Hemost. 2010 36 537 549 10.1055/s-0030-1255448 20632251
24. Beckers M.M. Ruven H.J. Seldenrijk C.A. Prins M.H. Biesma D.H. Risk of thrombosis and infections of central venous catheters and totally implanted access ports in patients treated for cancer Thromb. Res. 2010 125 318 321 10.1016/j.thromres.2009.06.008 19640573
25. Shivakumar S.P. Anderson D.R. Couban S. Catheter-associated thrombosis in patients with malignancy J. Clin. Oncol. 2009 27 4858 4864 10.1200/JCO.2009.22.6126 19738117
26. Esmon C.T. Does inflammation contribute to thrombotic events? Haemostasis 2000 30 34 40 10.1159/000054161 11251339
27. Lyman G.H. Khorana A.A. Kuderer N.M. Lee A.Y. Arcelus J.I. Balaban E.P. Clarke J.M. Flowers C.R. Francis C.W. Gates L.E. Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and treatment in patients with cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline update J. Clin. Oncol. 2013 31 2189 2204 10.1200/JCO.2013.49.1118 23669224
28. Anderson K.C. Alsina M. Atanackovic D. Biermann J.S. Chandler J.C. Costello C. Djulbegovic B. Fung H.C. Gasparetto C. Godby K. Multiple Myeloma, Version 2.2016 J. Natl. Compr. Cancer Netw. 2015 13 1398 1435 10.6004/jnccn.2015.0167 PMC4891187 26553768
29. Ay C. Posch F. Kaider A. Zielinski C. Pabinger I. Estimating risk of venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer in the presence of competing mortality J. Thromb. Haemost. 2015 13 390 397 10.1111/jth.12825 25529107 PMC7279950
30. Quan H. Sundararajan V. Halfon P. Fong A. Burnand B. Luthi J.C. Saunders L.D. Beck C.A. Feasby T.E. Ghali W.A. Coding algorithms for defining comorbidities in ICD-9-CM and ICD-10 administrative data Med. Care 2005 43 1130 1139 10.1097/01.mlr.0000182534.19832.83 16224307
31. Sanfilippo K.M. Wang T. Gage B.F. Liu W. Carson K.R. Improving accuracy of International Classification of Diseases codes for venous thromboembolism in administrative data Thromb. Res. 2015 135 616 620 10.1016/j.thromres.2015.01.012 25613924 PMC4361236
32. White R.H. Garcia M. Sadeghi B. Tancredi D.J. Zrelak P. Cuny J. Sama P. Gammon H. Schmaltz S. Romano P.S. Evaluation of the predictive value of ICD-9-CM coded administrative data for venous thromboembolism in the United States Thromb. Res. 2010 126 61 67 10.1016/j.thromres.2010.03.009 20430419
33. Zhan C. Battles J. Chiang Y.P. Hunt D. The validity of ICD-9-CM codes in identifying postoperative deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism Jt. Comm. J. Qual. Patient Saf. 2007 33 326 331 17566542 10.1016/s1553-7250(07)33037-7
34. Mahindra A. Laubach J. Raje N. Munshi N. Richardson P.G. Anderson K. Latest advances and current challenges in the treatment of multiple myeloma Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 2012 9 135 143 10.1038/nrclinonc.2012.15 22349016
35. Kumar S.K. Rajkumar S.V. Dispenzieri A. Lacy M.Q. Hayman S.R. Buadi F.K. Zeldenrust S.R. Dingli D. Russell S.J. Lust J.A. Improved survival in multiple myeloma and the impact of novel therapies Blood 2008 111 2516 2520 10.1182/blood-2007-10-116129 17975015 PMC2254544
36. Palumbo A. Cavo M. Bringhen S. Zamagni E. Romano A. Patriarca F. Rossi D. Gentilini F. Crippa C. Galli M. Aspirin, warfarin, or enoxaparin thromboprophylaxis in patients with multiple myeloma treated with thalidomide: A phase III, open-label, randomized trial J. Clin. Oncol. 2011 29 986 993 10.1200/JCO.2010.31.6844 21282540
37. Larocca A. Cavallo F. Bringhen S. Di Raimondo F. Falanga A. Evangelista A. Cavalli M. Stanevsky A. Corradini P. Pezzatti S. Aspirin or enoxaparin thromboprophylaxis for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma treated with lenalidomide Blood 2012 119 933 939 10.1182/blood-2011-03-344333 21835953
38. Khorana A.A. Dalal M.R. Lin J. Connolly G.C. Health care costs associated with venous thromboembolism in selected high-risk ambulatory patients with solid tumors undergoing chemotherapy in the United States Clinicoecon. Outcomes Res. 2013 5 101 108 10.2147/CEOR.S39964 23430767 PMC3575127
39. Lee A.Y. Anticoagulation in the treatment of established venous thromboembolism in patients with cancer J. Clin. Oncol. 2009 27 4895 4901 10.1200/JCO.2009.22.3958 19738121
40. Lyman G.H. Bohlke K. Khorana A.A. Kuderer N.M. Lee A.Y. Arcelus J.I. Balaban E.P. Clarke J.M. Flowers C.R. Francis C.W. Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis and treatment in patients with cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline update 2014 J. Clin. Oncol. 2015 33 654 656 10.1200/JCO.2014.59.7351 25605844 PMC4881372
41. Blom J.W. Vanderschoot J.P. Oostindier M.J. Osanto S. van der Meer F.J. Rosendaal F.R. Incidence of venous thrombosis in a large cohort of 66,329 cancer patients: Results of a record linkage study J. Thromb. Haemost. 2006 4 529 535 10.1111/j.1538-7836.2006.01804.x 16460435
42. Menon S.P. Rajkumar S.V. Lacy M. Falco P. Palumbo A. Thromboembolic events with lenalidomide-based therapy for multiple myeloma Cancer 2008 112 1522 1528 10.1002/cncr.23336 18278812 PMC2614405
43. Schneeweiss S. Avorn J. A review of uses of health care utilization databases for epidemiologic research on therapeutics J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2005 58 323 337 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.10.012 15862718
44. Zhan C. Miller M.R. Administrative data based patient safety research: A critical review Qual. Saf. Health Care 2003 12 ii58 ii63 10.1136/qhc.12.suppl_2.ii58 14645897 PMC1765777
45. Tamariz L. Harkins T. Nair V. A systematic review of validated methods for identifying venous thromboembolism using administrative and claims data Pharmacoepidemiol. Drug Saf. 2012 21 154 162 10.1002/pds.2341 22262602
46. Pauly N.J. Brown J.D. Prevalence of low-cost generic program use in a nationally representative cohort of privately insured adults J. Manag. Care Spec. Pharm. 2015 21 1162 1170 10.18553/jmcp.2015.21.12.1162 26679965 PMC10398242