↓ Skip to main content

Risk Factors for and Management of MPN-Associated Bleeding and Thrombosis

Overview of attention for article published in Current Hematologic Malignancy Reports, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
48 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
62 Mendeley
Title
Risk Factors for and Management of MPN-Associated Bleeding and Thrombosis
Published in
Current Hematologic Malignancy Reports, September 2017
DOI 10.1007/s11899-017-0400-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Karlyn Martin

Abstract

The Philadelphia chromosome-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) are characterized by both thrombotic and bleeding complications. The purpose of this review is to describe the risk factors associated with bleeding and thrombosis in MPN, as well as to review prevention strategies and management of these complications. Well-described risk factors for thrombotic complications include older age and history of prior thrombosis, along with traditional cardiovascular and venous thromboembolic risk factors. More recently, JAK2 V617F mutation has been found to carry an increased risk of thrombotic complications, whereas CALR has a lower risk than JAK2 mutation. Factors associated with an increased risk of bleeding in MPN include a prior history of bleeding, acquired von Willebrand syndrome, and primary myelofibrosis. Recent findings suggest that thrombocytosis carries a higher risk of bleeding than thrombosis in MPN, and aspirin may exacerbate this risk of bleeding, particularly in CALR-mutated ET. Much of the management of MPN focuses on predicting risk of bleeding and thrombosis and initiating prophylaxis to prevent complications in those at high risk of thrombosis. Emerging evidence suggests that sub-populations may have bleeding risk that outweighs thrombotic risk, particularly in setting of antiplatelet therapy. Future work is needed to better characterize this balance. At present, a thorough assessment of the risks of bleeding and thrombosis should be undertaken for each patient, and herein, we review risk factors for and management of these complications.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 62 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 15%
Researcher 6 10%
Student > Master 6 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Student > Postgraduate 5 8%
Other 12 19%
Unknown 19 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 44%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 15%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 1 2%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 23 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 September 2017.
All research outputs
#20,448,386
of 23,003,906 outputs
Outputs from Current Hematologic Malignancy Reports
#376
of 430 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#279,722
of 320,358 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Current Hematologic Malignancy Reports
#20
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,003,906 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 430 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 320,358 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.