Validation of National Early Warning Score and Quick Sequential (sepsis-related) Organ Failure Assessment in acute myeloid leukaemia patients treated with intensive chemotherapy.

OBJECTIVES: Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) is a risk factor for life-threatening infections. Early diagnosis and prompt interventions are associated with better outcomes, but the prediction of infection severity remains an open question. Recently, National Early Warning Score (NEWS) and quick sequential organ failure assessment (qSOFA) scores were proposed as warning clinical instruments predicting in-hospital mortality, but their role in the haematological context is still unknown. METHODS: We retrospectively assess the predictive role of NEWS and qSOFA in a large and homogeneous cohort of adult AML patients treated with intensive chemotherapy. In a total of 1048 neutropenic episodes recorded in 334 consecutive patients, the scores were applied to predict outcomes on the same day of fever onset, and after 24 and 48 h from score calculation. RESULTS: Both NEWS and qSOFA significantly predicted death, with more accuracy on the same day (NEWS AUROC 0.984 and qSOFA AUROC 0.969) and after 24 h (NEWS AUROC 0.928 and qSOFA AUROC 0.887), while remained moderately accurate after 48 h. Furthermore, also ICU admission was accurately predicted at fever onset and after 24 h. CONCLUSIONS: Both scores were useful tools in the management of post chemotherapy neutropenic febrile AML patients.

Interim 18-FDG-PET/CT failed to predict the outcome in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients treated at the diagnosis with rituximab-CHOP.

Role of interim-PET (I-PET) in diffuse large B-cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) is controversial. To determine predictive value of I-PET on progression-free survival (PFS), we enrolled 88 first-line DLBCL patients treated with 6-8 R-CHOP courses regardless of I-PET. PET/CT were performed at diagnosis, after 2 to 4 courses and at the end of therapy with central reviewing according to visual dichotomous criteria. Results are as follows: I-PET, 72% negative, 28% positive; final-PET (F-PET), 88% negative, 12% positive; clinical complete response 90%. Concordance between clinical response and F-PET negativity was 97% because of 2 false positive. With a median follow-up of 26.2 months, 2-year overall survival and PFS were 91% and 77%, respectively. Two-year PFS for I-PET and F-PET negative versus positive were as follows: I-PET 85% versus 72% (P = .0475); F-PET 83% versus 64% (P < .001). Because of a small number of events, 2 independent bivariate Cox models were tested for PFS. In model 1, F-PET contradicted I-PET (hazard ratio [HR] = 5.03, P = .015 vs 1.27, P = 691); in model 2, F-PET (HR = 4.54) and International propnostic Index score (HR = 5.36, P = .001) remained independent prognostic factors. In conclusion, positive I-PET is not predictive of a worse outcome in DLBCL; larger prospective studies and harmonization of I-PET reading criteria are needed.