Background: Bleeding risk is highly relevant for treatment decisions in cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT). Several risk scores exist, but have never been validated in patients with CAT and are not recommended for practice.
Objectives: To compare methods of estimating clinically relevant (major and clinically relevant nonmajor) bleeding risk in patients with CAT: (1) existing risk scores for bleeding in venous thromboembolism, (2) pragmatic classification based on cancer type, and (3) new prediction model.