Procalcitonin-Guided Management and Duration of Antibiotic Therapy in Critically Ill Cancer Patients With Sepsis (Pro-Can Study): A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of procalcitonin-guided management on the duration of antibiotic therapy in critically ill cancer patients with sepsis. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled, single-blinded trial. SETTING: A comprehensive multidisciplinary cancer hospital in Jordan. PATIENTS: Adults with cancer treated in the ICU who were started on antibiotics for suspected infection, met the SEPSIS-3 criteria, and were expected to stay in the ICU greater than or equal to 48 hours. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to the procalcitonin-guided or standard care (SC) arms. All patients had procalcitonin measured daily, up to 5 days or until ICU discharge or death. For the procalcitonin arm, a procalcitonin-guided algorithm was provided to guide antibiotic management, but clinicians were allowed to override the algorithm, if clinically indicated. In the SC arm, ICU clinicians were blinded to the procalcitonin levels. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Primary outcome was time to antibiotic cessation. We also evaluated the number of antibiotic-free days at 28 days, hospital discharge, or death, whichever came first, and antibiotic defined daily doses (DDDs). We enrolled 77 patients in the procalcitonin arm and 76 in the SC arm. Mean age was 58 ± 14 (sd) years, 67% were males, 74% had solid tumors, and 13% were neutropenic. Median (interquartile range [IQR]) Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores were 7 (6-10) and 7 (5-9) and procalcitonin concentrations (ng/mL) at baseline were 3.4 (0.8-16) and 3.4 (0.5-26), in the procalcitonin and SC arms, respectively. There was no difference in the median (IQR) time to antibiotic cessation in the procalcitonin and SC arms, 8 (4-11) and 8 (5-13), respectively (p = 0.463). Median (IQR) number of antibiotic-free days were 20 (17-24) and 20 (16-23), (p = 0.484) and total DDDs were 1541.4 and 2050.4 in the procalcitonin and SC arms, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In critically ill cancer patients with sepsis, procalcitonin-guided management did not reduce the duration of antibiotic treatment.

A Clinician's Guide to Understanding Bias in Critical Clinical Prediction Models.

This narrative review focuses on the role of clinical prediction models in supporting informed decision-making in critical care, emphasizing their 2 forms: traditional scores and artificial intelligence (AI)-based models. Acknowledging the potential for both types to embed biases, the authors underscore the importance of critical appraisal to increase our trust in models. The authors outline recommendations and critical care examples to manage risk of bias in AI models. The authors advocate for enhanced interdisciplinary training for clinicians, who are encouraged to explore various resources (books, journals, news Web sites, and social media) and events (Datathons) to deepen their understanding of risk of bias.

Assessment of Albumin Usage Patterns and Appropriateness in a Comprehensive Cancer Centre: A retrospective study in Jordan.

Objectives: Albumin is commonly used for various indications; however, there is conflicting data regarding its appropriate use in different clinical cases. This study aimed to determine the pattern and appropriateness of albumin use among cancer patients at the King Hussein Cancer Center in Jordan. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on adult cancer patients who were prescribed albumin between January 2019 and July 2020 in both outpatient and inpatient settings. Data collected included demographics, prescribing services, indications and dosing regimens. A literature review was performed using PubMed to assess the appropriateness of albumin indications and dosing regimens against current guidelines, drug information resources and the package insert. Results: Albumin was prescribed to 1,361 patients during the study period. Each patient received an average of 74.4 ± 89 g of albumin for an average of 2.6 ± 1.8 days. Albumin use was deemed appropriate in 69% of the patients. The critical care service accounted for the highest albumin consumption, with 37% of prescriptions for septic shock. Inappropriate use of albumin was most prevalent in the medical solid tumour services (40.8% of prescriptions), primarily for edema (28%). Conclusion: To the best of the author's knowledge, this study is the first to evaluate albumin use in a large cohort of oncology patients. Approximately one-third of the albumin prescriptions were considered inappropriate. Continuous education on appropriate usage and regular evaluations of guideline adherence are essential to ensure proper utilisation of albumin in cancer care.

Centering Digital Health Equity During Technology Innovation: Protocol for a Comprehensive Scoping Review of Evidence-Based Tools and Approaches.

BACKGROUND: In the rush to develop health technologies for the COVID-19 pandemic, the unintended consequence of digital health inequity or the inability of priority communities to access, use, and receive equal benefits from digital health technologies was not well examined. OBJECTIVE: This scoping review will examine tools and approaches that can be used during digital technology innovation to improve equitable inclusion of priority communities in the development of digital health technologies. The results from this study will provide actionable insights for professionals in health care, health informatics, digital health, and technology development to proactively center equity during innovation. METHODS: Based on the Arksey and O'Malley framework, this scoping review will consider priority communities' equitable involvement in digital technology innovation. Bibliographic databases in health, medicine, computing, and information sciences will be searched. Retrieved citations will be double screened against the inclusion and exclusion criteria using Covidence (Veritas Health Innovation). Data will be charted using a tailored extraction tool and mapped to a digital health innovation pathway defined by the Centre for eHealth Research roadmap for eHealth technologies. An accompanying narrative synthesis will describe the outcomes in relation to the review's objectives. RESULTS: This scoping review is currently in progress. The search of databases and other sources returned a total of 4868 records. After the initial screening of titles and abstracts, 426 studies are undergoing dual full-text review. We are aiming to complete the full-text review stage by May 30, 2024, data extraction in October 2024, and subsequent synthesis in December 2024. Funding was received on October 1, 2023, from the Centre for Health Equity Incubator Grant Scheme, University of Melbourne, Australia. CONCLUSIONS: This paper will identify and recommend a series of validated tools and approaches that can be used by health care stakeholders and IT developers to produce equitable digital health technology across the Centre for eHealth Research roadmap. Identified evidence gaps, possible implications, and further research will be discussed. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/53855.

The concomitant use of ultra short beta-blockers with vasopressors and inotropes in critically ill patients with septic shock: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Background: Septic shock is associated with systemic inflammatory response, hemodynamic instability, impaired sympathetic control, and the development of multiorgan dysfunction that requires vasopressor or inotropic support. The regulation of immune function in sepsis is complex and varies over time. However, activating Beta-2 receptors and blocking Beta-1 receptors reduces the proinflammatory response by influencing cytokine production. Evidence that supports the concomitant use of ultra short beta-blockers with inotropes and vasopressors in patients with septic shock is still limited. This study aimed to evaluate the use of ultra short beta-blockers and its impact on the ICU related outcomes such as mortality, length of stay, heart rate control, shock resolution, and vasopressors/inotropes requirements. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials including critically ill patients with septic shock who received inotropes and vasopressors. Patients who received either epinephrine or norepinephrine without beta-blockers "control group" were compared to patients who received ultra short beta-blockers concomitantly with either epinephrine or norepinephrine "Intervention group". MEDLINE and Embase databases were utilized to systematically search for studies investigating the use of ultra short beta-blockers in critically ill patients on either epinephrine or norepinephrine from inception to October 10, 2023. The primary outcome was the 28-day mortality. While, length of stay, heart rate control, and inotropes/ vasopressors requirements were considered secondary outcomes. Results: Among 47 potentially relevant studies, nine were included in the analysis. The 28-day mortality risk was lower in patients with septic shock who used ultra short beta-blockers concomitantly with either epinephrine or norepinephrine compared with the control group (RR (95%CI): 0.69 (0.53, 0.89), I2=26%; P=0.24). In addition, heart rate was statistically significantly lower with a standardized mean difference (SMD) of -22.39 (95% CI: -24.71, -20.06) among the beta-blockers group than the control group. The SMD for hospital length of stay and the inotropes requirement were not statistically different between the two groups (SMD (95%CI): -0.57 (-2.77, 1.64), and SMD (95%CI): 0.08 (-0.02, 0.19), respectively). Conclusion: The use of ultra short beta-blockers concomitantly with either epinephrine or norepinephrine in critically ill patients with septic shock was associated with better heart rate control and survival benefits without increment in the inotropes and vasopressors requirement.

2024 Focused Update: Guidelines on Use of Corticosteroids in Sepsis, Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome, and Community-Acquired Pneumonia.

RATIONALE: New evidence is available examining the use of corticosteroids in sepsis, acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), warranting a focused update of the 2017 guideline on critical illness-related corticosteroid insufficiency. OBJECTIVES: To develop evidence-based recommendations for use of corticosteroids in hospitalized adults and children with sepsis, ARDS, and CAP. PANEL DESIGN: The 22-member panel included diverse representation from medicine, including adult and pediatric intensivists, pulmonologists, endocrinologists, nurses, pharmacists, and clinician-methodologists with expertise in developing evidence-based Clinical Practice Guidelines. We followed Society of Critical Care Medicine conflict of interest policies in all phases of the guideline development, including task force selection and voting. METHODS: After development of five focused Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcomes (PICO) questions, we conducted systematic reviews to identify the best available evidence addressing each question. We evaluated the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach and formulated recommendations using the evidence-to-decision framework. RESULTS: In response to the five PICOs, the panel issued four recommendations addressing the use of corticosteroids in patients with sepsis, ARDS, and CAP. These included a conditional recommendation to administer corticosteroids for patients with septic shock and critically ill patients with ARDS and a strong recommendation for use in hospitalized patients with severe CAP. The panel also recommended against high dose/short duration administration of corticosteroids for septic shock. In response to the final PICO regarding type of corticosteroid molecule in ARDS, the panel was unable to provide specific recommendations addressing corticosteroid molecule, dose, and duration of therapy, based on currently available evidence. CONCLUSIONS: The panel provided updated recommendations based on current evidence to inform clinicians, patients, and other stakeholders on the use of corticosteroids for sepsis, ARDS, and CAP.

Long-term Outcomes of Cancer Patients Admitted to the ICU with Septic Shock.

INTRODUCTION: Several studies evaluated the outcomes of cancer patients treated with septic shock in intensive care units (ICUs), but limited data is available on the long-term outcomes of this patient population. In this report, we aimed to evaluate the one-year mortality in cancer patients who were discharged alive following their intensive care unit (ICU) admission for septic shock. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective study that was conducted at an oncologic ICU of a comprehensive cancer center. The study included all adult cancer patients who were admitted to the ICU with septic shock between 2008 and 2019. Septic shock was defined as the need to start vasopressors within the first 24 hours of ICU admission with sepsis. Patient baseline characteristics and longterm outcomes were evaluated. Descriptive analysis was used to report the data. RESULTS: Of the 1408 cancer patients who were admitted to the ICU with septic shock, 494 patients (35%) were discharged alive from the hospital. Their mean age was 56.3±16.5 (SD) years, 321 (65%) were males, and 326 (66%) had solid tumors. At 1-year, 258 patients died as follows: 129 (50%) died during the first 3-months, 69 (27%) patients died between 3 and 6-months, and 60 (23%) patients died between 6 and 12-months, resulting in a mortality rate of 74%, 78.9% and 83.2%, at the 3-months, 6-months and 1-year, respectively. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: In this cohort of cancer patients, we described the long-term outcomes of patients treated in the ICU with septic shock. The majority of the included patients died during the first year following their ICU admission. Future studies should identify measures to improve the outcomes of this patient population.

Patient diversity and author representation in clinical studies supporting the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines for management of sepsis and septic shock 2021: a systematic review of citations.

BACKGROUND: The generalizability of the Surviving Sepsis Campaign (SSC) guidelines to various patient populations and hospital settings has been debated. A quantitative assessment of the diversity and representation in the clinical evidence supporting the guidelines would help evaluate the generalizability of the recommendations and identify strategic research goals and priorities. In this study, we evaluated the diversity of patients in the original studies, in terms of sex, race/ethnicity, and geographical location. We also assessed diversity in sex and geographical representation among study first and last authors. METHODS: All clinical studies cited in support of the 2021 SSC adult guideline recommendations were identified. Original clinical studies were included, while editorials, reviews, non-clinical studies, and meta-analyses were excluded. For eligible studies, we recorded the proportion of male patients, percentage of each represented racial/ethnic subgroup (when available), and countries in which they were conducted. We also recorded the sex and location of the first and last authors. The World Bank classification was used to categorize countries. RESULTS: The SSC guidelines included six sections, with 85 recommendations based on 351 clinical studies. The proportion of male patients ranged from 47 to 62%. Most studies did not report the racial/ ethnic distribution of the included patients; when they did so, most were White patients (68-77%). Most studies were conducted in high-income countries (77-99%), which included Europe/Central Asia (33-66%) and North America (36-55%). Moreover, most first/last authors were males (55-93%) and from high-income countries (77-99%). CONCLUSIONS: To enhance the generalizability of the SCC guidelines, stakeholders should define strategies to enhance the diversity and representation in clinical studies. Though there was reasonable representation in sex among patients included in clinical studies, the evidence did not reflect diversity in the race/ethnicity and geographical locations. There was also lack of diversity among the first and last authors contributing to the evidence.

Critical Bias in Critical Care Devices.

Critical care data contain information about the most physiologically fragile patients in the hospital, who require a significant level of monitoring. However, medical devices used for patient monitoring suffer from measurement biases that have been largely underreported. This article explores sources of bias in commonly used clinical devices, including pulse oximeters, thermometers, and sphygmomanometers. Further, it provides a framework for mitigating these biases and key principles to achieve more equitable health care delivery.

A new tool for evaluating health equity in academic journals; the Diversity Factor.

Current methods to evaluate a journal's impact rely on the downstream citation mapping used to generate the Impact Factor. This approach is a fragile metric prone to being skewed by outlier values and does not speak to a researcher's contribution to furthering health outcomes for all populations. Therefore, we propose the implementation of a Diversity Factor to fulfill this need and supplement the current metrics. It is composed of four key elements: dataset properties, author country, author gender and departmental affiliation. Due to the significance of each individual element, they should be assessed independently of each other as opposed to being combined into a simplified score to be optimized. Herein, we discuss the necessity of such metrics, provide a framework to build upon, evaluate the current landscape through the lens of each key element and publish the findings on a freely available website that enables further evaluation. The OpenAlex database was used to extract the metadata of all papers published from 2000 until August 2022, and Natural language processing was used to identify individual elements. Features were then displayed individually on a static dashboard developed using TableauPublic, which is available at www.equitablescience.com. In total, 130,721 papers were identified from 7,462 journals where significant underrepresentation of LMIC and Female authors was demonstrated. These findings are pervasive and show no positive correlation with the Journal's Impact Factor. The systematic collection of the Diversity Factor concept would allow for more detailed analysis, highlight gaps in knowledge, and reflect confidence in the translation of related research. Conversion of this metric to an active pipeline would account for the fact that how we define those most at risk will change over time and quantify responses to particular initiatives. Therefore, continuous measurement of outcomes across groups and those investigating those outcomes will never lose importance. Moving forward, we encourage further revision and improvement by diverse author groups in order to better refine this concept.

The Reviewer Academy of the Society of Critical Care Medicine: Key Principles and Strategic Plan.

The Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) Reviewer Academy seeks to train and establish a community of trusted, reliable, and skilled peer reviewers with diverse backgrounds and interests to promote high-quality reviews for each of the SCCM journals. Goals of the Academy include building accessible resources to highlight qualities of excellent manuscript reviews; educating and mentoring a diverse group of healthcare professionals; and establishing and upholding standards for insightful and informative reviews. This manuscript will map the mission of the Reviewer Academy with a succinct summary of the importance of peer review, process of reviewing a manuscript, and the expected ethical standards of reviewers. We will equip readers to target concise, thoughtful feedback as peer reviewers, advance their understanding of the editorial process and inspire readers to integrate medical journalism into diverse professional careers.

Bias in artificial intelligence algorithms and recommendations for mitigation.

The adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms is rapidly increasing in healthcare. Such algorithms may be shaped by various factors such as social determinants of health that can influence health outcomes. While AI algorithms have been proposed as a tool to expand the reach of quality healthcare to underserved communities and improve health equity, recent literature has raised concerns about the propagation of biases and healthcare disparities through implementation of these algorithms. Thus, it is critical to understand the sources of bias inherent in AI-based algorithms. This review aims to highlight the potential sources of bias within each step of developing AI algorithms in healthcare, starting from framing the problem, data collection, preprocessing, development, and validation, as well as their full implementation. For each of these steps, we also discuss strategies to mitigate the bias and disparities. A checklist was developed with recommendations for reducing bias during the development and implementation stages. It is important for developers and users of AI-based algorithms to keep these important considerations in mind to advance health equity for all populations.

Prevalence and Predictors of Multi-Drug Resistant Organisms Among Ambulatory Cancer Patients with Urinary Tract Infections.

Purpose: Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are among the most common community-acquired infections in patients with cancer. Though the prevalence of multi-drug resistant organisms (MDROs) has increased, there are limited studies on MDROs among ambulatory cancer patients with UTIs. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the prevalence and predictors of MDROs in this patient population. Patients and Methods: A retrospective study of adult cancer patients treated for bacterial UTIs in the ambulatory setting at King Hussein Cancer Center. The medical laboratory's system was used to identify positive urine cultures taken in the ambulatory setting, between Aug 2020 and March 2021. UTIs were defined as a positive urine culture along with the initiation of antibiotics empirically or as definitive therapy. Patient characteristics, as well as the type and sensitivity of the bacterial organisms, were recorded. MDROs were defined as intrinsic or acquired non-susceptibility to at least one agent in three or more antimicrobial categories. Logistic regression was used to identify predictors that were independently associated with MDROs. Results: A total of 376 patients had UTIs that met the inclusion criteria; mean age 60.5±15.1 (SD) years and 330 (87.8%) had solid tumors. Gram-negative bacteria was recorded in the majority of UTIs (n = 368, 97.9%), the most common being Escherichia-coli (n = 220, 59.8%) and Klebsiella-pneumonia (n = 68, 18.5%). MDROs were recorded in 226 (60.1%) of urine cultures, with the majority being extended-spectrum-beta-lactamase producing organisms (n = 142, 62.8%). The only significant predictor was having had a UTI with MDRO within the past 6 months (OR 5.6, 95% CI 2.1-15.2). Conclusion: More than half of the positive urine cultures of cancer patients treated for UTIs in the ambulatory setting were MDROs. A subsequent UTI due to MDROs is more likely to occur in patients who had a UTI with an MDRO within the past 6 months.

Delayed Anaphylaxis to Intravenous Colistin in a Critically Ill Cancer Patient: A Case Report.

Introduction: Anaphylaxis is an acute, life-threatening, multi-system syndrome that has been reported with a wide range of medications. Though anaphylaxis usually has a rapid onset, we describe a patient who developed anaphylaxis to intravenous colistin after 28 days of daily administration. Case presentation: A 20 years-old Caucasian male patient, with a history of relapsed acute myeloid leukemia, was transferred from the medical floor to our intensive care unit with septic shock. The source of infection was presumed to be a recto-cecal abscess and arm cellulitis. Cultures were positive for extended spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) and carbapenem-resistant enterobacteriaceae (CRE) Escherichia coli. for which he was receiving broad spectrum antibiotics, as well as intravenous colistin, started about 4 weeks earlier. On day 2 of ICU admission, and during the administration of colistin, the patient experienced an anaphylactic reaction. He developed hypotension requiring the initiation of norepinephrine, shortness of breath, hypoxia, tachycardia, and tachypnea. The reaction was resolved after supportive therapy but it was thought to be related to septic shock and therefore the patient continued on colistin the following day. The patient tolerated colistin for the next 3 days before developing another similar, but more severe, reaction. Colistin was discontinued and the symptoms resolved following supportive therapy. Conclusion: This case highlights the importance of being aware of delayed serious reactions that may occur several weeks after initiation of drug therapy. In addition, successful re-initiation may not necessarily rule out the recurrence of such reactions and therefore close monitoring is crucial.

Bayesian method application: Integrating mathematical modeling into clinical pharmacy through vancomycin therapeutic monitoring.

The most recent consensus guidelines for dosing and monitoring vancomycin recommended the use of area-under-the-curve with Bayesian estimation for therapeutic monitoring. As this is a modern concept in the practice of clinical pharmacy, the main objective of this review is to introduce the fundamentals of Bayesian estimation and its mathematical application as it relates to vancomycin therapeutic drug monitoring. In addition, we aim to identify pharmacokinetic (PK) software programs that incorporate Bayesian estimation for vancomycin dosing and to describe the PK models utilized in those software programs for the adult population. Twelve software programs that utilize Bayesian estimation were identified, which included: Adult and Pediatric Kinetics, Best Dose, ClinCalc, DoseMeRx, ID-ODS, InsightRx, MwPharm++, NextDose, PrecisePK, TDMx, Tucuxi, and VancoCalc. The software programs varied in the population PK models used as the Bayesian a priori. With the presence of various vancomycin Bayesian software programs, it is important to choose those that utilize PK models reflective of the specific patient population.

All-cause mortality in cancer patients treated for sepsis in intensive care units: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Sepsis is a common complication in patients with cancer, but studies evaluating the outcomes of critically ill cancer patients with sepsis on a global scale are limited. We aimed to summarize the existing evidence on mortality rates in this patient population. METHODS: Prospective and retrospective observational studies evaluating critically ill adult cancer patients with sepsis, severe sepsis, and/or septic shock were included. Studies published from January 2010 to September 2021 that reported at least one mortality outcome were retrieved from MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), and Cochrane databases. Study selection, bias assessment, and data collection were performed independently by two reviewers, and any discrepancies were resolved by a third reviewer. The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. We calculated pooled intensive care unit (ICU), hospital, and 28/30-day mortality rates. The heterogeneity of the data was tested using the chi-square test, with a P value < 0.10 indicating significant heterogeneity. RESULTS: A total of 5464 citations were reviewed, of which 10 studies met the inclusion criteria; these studies included 6605 patients. All studies had a Newcastle-Ottawa scale score of 7 or higher. The mean patient age ranged from 51.4 to 64.9 years. The pooled ICU, hospital, and 28/30 day mortality rates were 48% (95% CI, 43- 53%; I2 = 80.6%), 62% (95% CI, 58-67%; I2 = 0%), and 50% (95% CI, 38- 62%; I2 = 98%), respectively. Substantial between-study heterogeneity was observed. CONCLUSION: Critically ill cancer patients with sepsis had poor survival, with a hospital mortality rate of about two-thirds. The substantial observed heterogeneity among studies could be attributed to variability in the criteria used to define sepsis as well as variability in treatment, the severity of illness, and care across settings. Our results are a call to action to identify strategies that improve outcomes for cancer patients with sepsis.

Validation of the CSRFENCE score for prediction of febrile neutropenia during chemotherapy cycles 2-6.

PURPOSE: Though febrile neutropenia (FN) risk prediction models are important in clinical practice, their external validation is limited. In this study, we validated the Cycle-Specific Risk of FEbrile Neutropenia after ChEmotherapy (CSRFENCE) score for predicting FN. METHODS: We reviewed the medical records of patients with solid malignancies and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma during chemotherapy cycles 2-6 and recorded if patients developed FN, defined as absolute neutrophil counts less than 500 cells/microL with fever more than or equal to 38.2 â„ƒ. The CSRFENCE score was determined by adding the risk factors' coefficients described by the original study; subsequently, the score was used to classify chemotherapy cycles into the following risk groups for developing FN: low, intermediate, high, and very high risk. The discriminatory ability of the score was assessed using area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROCC) and incidence rate ratios (IRR) within each CSRFENCE risk group. RESULTS: We analyzed 2870 chemotherapy cycles, of which 42 (1.5%) were associated with FN. Among those, 3 (7.1%), 14 (33.3%), 5 (12%), and 20 (47.6%) were classified as low, intermediate, high, and very high risk for developing FN, respectively. The AUROCC was 0.72 (95% CI 0.64-0.81). Compared with the low risk group (n = 666), the IRR of developing FN was 1.01 (95% CI 0.15-43.37), 0.69 (95% CI 0.08-32.46) and 1.17 (95% CI 0.17-49.49) in the intermediate (n = 1431), high (n = 498) and very high (n = 275) risk groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: The CSRFENCE model can moderately stratify patients into four risk groups for predicting FN prior to chemotherapy cycles 2-6.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Evaluating Geographical Variation in Outcomes of Cancer Patients Treated in ICUs.

The reported mortality rates of cancer patients admitted to ICUs vary widely. In addition, there are no studies that examined the outcomes of critically ill cancer patients based on the geographical regions. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the mortality rates among critically ill cancer patients and provide a comparison based on geography. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science. STUDY SELECTION: We included observational studies evaluating adult patients with cancer treated in ICUs. We excluded non-English studies, those with greater than 30% hematopoietic stem cell transplant or postsurgical patients, and those that evaluated a specific type of critical illness, stage of malignancy, or age group. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently applied eligibility criteria, assessed quality, and extracted data. Studies were classified based on the continent in which they were conducted. Primary outcomes were ICU and hospital mortality. We pooled effect sizes by geographical region. DATA SYNTHESIS: Forty-six studies were included (n = 110,366). The overall quality of studies was moderate. Most of the published literature was from Europe (n = 22), followed by North America (n = 9), Asia (n = 8), South America (n = 5), and Oceania (n = 2). Pooled ICU mortality rate was 38% (95% CI, 33-43%); the lowest mortality rate was in Oceania (26%; 95% CI, 22-30%) and highest in Asia (51%; 95% CI, 44-57%). Pooled hospital mortality rate was 45% (95% CI, 41-49%), with the lowest in North America (37%; 95% CI, 31-43%) and highest in Asia (54%; 95% CI, 37-71%). CONCLUSIONS: More than half of cancer patients admitted to ICUs survived hospitalization. However, there was wide variability in the mortality rates, as well as the number of available studies among geographical regions. This variability suggests an opportunity to improve outcomes worldwide, through optimizing practice and research.