Critical care of patients with cancer

Cytokine release syndrome. Reviewing a new entity in the intensive care unit

Immunotherapy seeks to harness the power of the immune system to eradicate malignant tissues. Despite impressive therapeutic success, however, it can be accompanied by severe adverse effects such as cytokine release syndrome (CRS). These therapies cause the release of a great amount of cytokines, with IL-6 playing a central role, that can potentially lead to multiple organ dysfunction. The diagnosis is based on the presence of compatible clinical symptoms, elevated biomarkers and recent treatment with a biological agent. Mild cases can be managed through symptomatic treatment and fluids, while more severe episodes may need supportive therapy and specific care with the anti-IL-6 receptor monoclonal antibody tocilizumab. Although corticosteroids are also effective, they suppress T-cell activity, and so should only be considered as second line therapy or in cases of severe neurological involvement, since tocilizumab does not cross the blood-brain barrier. Cytokine release syndrome generally has a good prognosis, often being reversible and with a good response to specific treatment. Despite possible concerns about the admission of such patients (mainly with advanced oncological disease), we consider that the Intensive Care Unit should remain an option, since these individuals present a potentially reversible drug-related adverse event and are being treated with a new drug that could change the prognosis of the disorder. Intensive care medicine will become a key component in the management of the complications of modern cancer therapies, dealing with patients presenting an overactive immune system producing organ dysfunction while also trying to maintain treatment efficacy. This is the new paradigm.

Effect of intensivist involvement on clinical outcomes in patients with advanced lung cancer admitted to the intensive care unit

Purpose

Intensive care unit (ICU)-related mortality for lung cancer is ranked highest among the solid tumors and little information exists on the role of intensivists on clinical outcomes. This study aimed to elucidate the intensivist’s contribution toward clinical outcomes.

Materials and methods

Data of advanced lung cancer patients, including stage IIIB or IV non-small cell lung cancer and extensive-stage small cell lung cancer, admitted to the ICU from 2005 to 2016 were analyzed. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to determine variables associated with ICU and in-hospital mortality. Autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) for time-series was used to assess the intensivist’s impact.

Results

Of 264 patients, 85 (32.2%) were admitted to the ICU before and 179 (67.8%) after organized intensive care introduction in 2011. Before and after 2011, the changes observed were as follows: ICU mortality rate, 43.5% to 40.2%, respectively (p = 0.610); hospital mortality rate, 82.4% to 65. 9% (p = 0.006). The duration of ICU and hospital stay decreased after 2011 (14.5±16.5 vs. 8.3 ± 8.6, p < 0.001; 36.6 ± 37.2 vs. 22.0 ± 19.6, p < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, admission after 2011 was independently associated with decreased hospital mortality (Odds ratio 0.42, 95% confidence interval 0.21–0.77, p = 0.006). In ARIMA models, intensivist involvement was associated with significantly reduced hospital mortality. (Estimate -17.95, standard error 5.31, p = 0.001)

Conclusion

In patients with advanced lung cancer, organized intensive care could contribute to improved clinical outcomes.

Influence of neutropenia on mortality of critically ill cancer patients: results of a meta-analysis on individual data

Background

The study objective was to assess the influence of neutropenia on outcome of critically ill cancer patients by meta-analysis of individual data. Secondary objectives were to assess the influence of neutropenia on outcome of critically ill patients in prespecified subgroups (according to underlying tumor, period of admission, need for mechanical ventilation and use of granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF)).

Methods

Data sources were PubMed and the Cochrane database. Study selection included articles focusing on critically ill cancer patients published in English and studies in humans from May 2005 to May 2015. For study selection, the study eligibility was assessed by two investigators. Individual data from selected studies were obtained from corresponding authors.

Results

Overall, 114 studies were identified and authors of 30 studies (26.3% of selected studies) agreed to participate in this study. Of the 7515 included patients, three were excluded due to a missing major variable (neutropenia or mortality) leading to analysis of 7512 patients, including 1702 neutropenic patients (22.6%). After adjustment for confounders, and taking study effect into account, neutropenia was independently associated with mortality (OR 1.41; 95% CI 1.23–1.62; P = 0.03). When analyzed separately, neither admission period, underlying malignancy nor need for mechanical ventilation modified the prognostic influence of neutropenia on outcome. However, among patients for whom data on G-CSF administration were available (n = 1949; 25.9%), neutropenia was no longer associated with outcome in patients receiving G-CSF (OR 1.03; 95% CI 0.70–1.51; P = 0.90).

Conclusion

Among 7512 critically ill cancer patients included in this systematic review, neutropenia was independently associated with poor outcome despite a meaningful survival. Neutropenia was no longer significantly associated with outcome in patients treated by G-CSF, which may suggest a beneficial effect of G-CSF in neutropenic critically ill cancer patients.

Systematic review registration

PROSPERO CRD42015026347. Date of registration: Sept 18 2015

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13054-018-2076-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Cytokine release syndrome

During the last decade the field of cancer immunotherapy has witnessed impressive progress. Highly effective immunotherapies such as immune checkpoint inhibition, and T-cell engaging therapies like bispecific T-cell engaging (BiTE) single-chain antibody constructs and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells have shown remarkable efficacy in clinical trials and some of these agents have already received regulatory approval. However, along with growing experience in the clinical application of these potent immunotherapeutic agents comes the increasing awareness of their inherent and potentially fatal adverse effects, most notably the cytokine release syndrome (CRS). This review provides a comprehensive overview of the mechanisms underlying CRS pathophysiology, risk factors, clinical presentation, differential diagnoses, and prognostic factors. In addition, based on the current evidence we give practical guidance to the management of the cytokine release syndrome.

Bloodstream infection caused by S. aureus in patients with cancer: a 10-year longitudinal single-center study

BACKGROUND

Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infections (SABIs) represent a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in cancer patients. In this study, we compared infection characteristics and evaluated epidemiology and risk factors associated to SABIs and 30-day attributable mortality in cancer patients.

METHODS

Clinical and microbiological data from patients with cancer and positive blood cultures for S. aureus were retrieved during a 10-year period at an oncology reference center. Analyses were performed according to type of malignancy and infection with methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA). Data was evaluated using competing risk analyses to identify risk factors associated to 30-day mortality and used to create a point system for mortality risk stratification.

RESULTS

We included 450 patients and MRSA was documented in 21.1%. Hospital-acquired infection, healthcare-associated pneumonia, and type-2 diabetes were associated to MRSA. In patients with hematologic malignancies, MRSA was more frequent if hospital-acquired, but less likely in primary bacteremia. Variables associated to mortality included abdominal source of infection, hematologic malignancy, MRSA, glucose levels > 140 mg/dL, and infectious endocarditis; catheter removal and initiation of adequate treatment within 48 h of positive blood culture were protective factors. From our designed mortality prediction scale, patients with a score > 3 had a 70.23% (95%CI 47.2-85.3%) probability of infection-related death at 30 days.

CONCLUSION

SABIs are a significant health burden for cancer patients. Risk factors for SABI-related mortality in this population are varied and impose a challenge for management to improve patient's outcomes. Risk stratification might be useful to evaluate 30-day mortality risk.

[Cancer patients in operative intensive care medicine]

Die Prävalenz onkologischer Erkrankungen ist in den vergangenen Jahrzehnten stetig angestiegen. Durch neue Therapieoptionen können immer mehr Patienten mit einem kurativen Therapieansatz behandelt werden. Diese individualisierten und teilweise sehr aggressiven Therapien können jedoch auch zu schweren Nebenwirkungen führen. Diese sollten als wichtige Differenzialdiagnosen zu anderen vitalbedrohlichen Krankheitsbildern auch dem im OP und als Intensivmediziner tätigen Anästhesisten bekannt sein. Krebspatienten werden häufig auf operativen Intensivstationen aufgenommen, um Komplikationen der malignen Grunderkrankung oder auch Nebenwirkungen einer operativen oder konservativen Therapie zu behandeln. Aktuelle Untersuchungen zeigen, dass die maligne Grunderkrankung entgegen bisheriger Annahme keinen wesentlichen Einfluss auf das Intensivüberleben hat. Bei der Aufnahme eines onkologischen Patienten sollte daher die akut vorliegende Organdysfunktion zunächst im Vordergrund stehen. Bei der Therapiezielplanung gilt es, nicht zu übersehen, wann ein kuratives in ein palliatives Konzept übergehen muss. Hierfür müssen neue Aufnahmestrategien und -kriterien entwickelt und evaluiert werden. In diesem Übersichtsartikel werden Diagnosen und Therapien häufiger intensivmedizinischer Krankheitsbilder von onkologischen Patienten sowie Nebenwirkungen moderner onkologischer Therapien dargelegt und Aufnahmestrategien für Patienten mit malignen Erkrankungen vorgestellt.

Biomarkers as predictors of mortality in critically ill patients with solid tumors

Biochemical markers produced by the affected organ or body in response to disease have gained high clinical value due to assess disease development and being excellent predictors of morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study is to analyze different biochemical markers in critically cancer patients and to determine which of them can be used as predictors of mortality. This is a prospective, cross-sectional study conducted at a University Hospital in Porto Alegre - RS. Screening was done to include patients in the study. Serum biochemical markers obtained in the first 24 hours of Intensive Care Unit hospitalization were analyzed. A second review of medical records occurred after three months objected to identify death or Unit discharged. A sample of 130 individuals was obtained (control group n = 65, study group n = 65). In the multivariate model, serum magnesium values ​​OR = 3.97 (1.17; 13.5), presence of neoplasia OR = 2.68 (95% CI 1.13; 6.37) and absence of sepsis OR = 0.31 (95% CI 0.12; 0.79) were robust predictors of mortality. The association of solid tumors, sepsis presence and alteration in serum magnesium levels resulted in an increased chance of mortality in critically ill patients.

Palliative Care Communication in the ICU: Implications for an Oncology-Critical Care Nursing Partnership

OBJECTIVES

To describe the development, launch, implementation, and outcomes of a unique multisite collaborative (ie, IMPACT-ICU [Integrating Multidisciplinary Palliative Care into the ICU]) to teach ICU nurses communication skills specific to palliative care. To identify options for collaboration between oncology and critical care nurses when integrating palliation into nursing care planning.

DATA SOURCES

Published literature and collective experiences of the authors in the provision of onco-critical-palliative care.

CONCLUSION

While critical care nurses were the initial focus of education, oncology, telemetry, step-down, and medical-surgical nurses within five university medical centers subsequently participated in this learning collaborative. Participants reported enhanced confidence in communicating with patients, families, and physicians, offering emotional support and involvement in family meetings.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

Communication education is a vital yet missing element of undergraduate nursing education. Programs should be offered in the work setting to address this gap in needed nurse competency, particularly within the context of onco-critical-palliative care.

Characteristics and Outcome of Cancer Patients Admitted to the ICU in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland and National Trends Between 1997 and 2013

OBJECTIVE

To describe trends in outcomes of cancer patients with an unplanned admission to the ICU between 1997 and 2013 and to identify risk factors for mortality of those admitted between 2009 and 2013.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis.

SETTING

Intensive Care National Audit & Research Centre Case Mix Programme Database including data of ICUs in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland.

PATIENTS

Patients (99,590) with a solid tumor and 13,538 patients with a hematological malignancy with an unplanned ICU admission between 1997 and 2013; 39,734 solid tumor patients and 6,652 patients with a hematological malignancy who were admitted between 2009 and 2013 were analyzed in depth.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

In solid tumor patients admitted between 2009 and 2013, hospital mortality was 26.4%. Independent risk factors for hospital mortality were metastatic disease (odds ratio, 1.99), cardiopulmonary resuscitation before ICU admission (odds ratio, 1.63), Intensive Care National Audit & Research Centre Physiology score (odds ratio, 1.14), admission for gastrointestinal (odds ratio, 1.12), respiratory (odds ratio, 1.48) or neurological (odds ratio, 1.65) reasons, and previous ICU admission (odds ratio, 1.18). In patients with a hematological malignancy admitted between 2009 and 2013, hospital mortality was 53.6%. Independent risk factors for hospital mortality were age (odds ratio, 1.02), cardiopulmonary resuscitation before ICU admission (odds ratio, 1.90), Intensive Care National Audit & Research Centre Physiology Score (odds ratio, 1.12), admission for hematological (odds ratio, 1.48) or respiratory (odds ratio, 1.56) reasons, bone marrow transplant (odds ratio, 1.53), previous ICU admission (odds ratio, 1.43), and mechanical ventilation within 24 hours of admission (odds ratio, 1.33). Trend analysis showed a significant decrease in ICU and hospital mortality and length of stay between 1997 and 2013 despite little change in severity of illness during this time.

CONCLUSIONS

Between 1997 and 2013, the outcome of cancer patients with an unplanned admission to ICU improved significantly. Among those admitted between 2009 and 2013, independent risk factors for hospital mortality were age, severity of illness, previous cardiopulmonary resuscitation, previous ICU admission, metastatic disease, and admission for respiratory reasons.

The Intensive Care Medicine research agenda on critically ill oncology and hematology patients

Over the coming years, accelerating progress against cancer will be associated with an increased number of patients who require life-sustaining therapies for infectious or toxic chemotherapy-related events. Major changes include increased number of cancer patients admitted to the ICU with full-code status or for time-limited trials, increased survival and quality of life in ICU survivors, changing prognostic factors, early ICU admission for optimal monitoring, and use of noninvasive diagnostic and therapeutic strategies. In this review, experts in the management of critically ill cancer patients highlight recent changes in the use and the results of intensive care in patients with malignancies. They seek to put forward a standard of care for the management of these patients and highlight important updates that are required to care for them. The research agenda they suggest includes important studies to be conducted in the next few years to increase our understanding of organ dysfunction in this population and to improve our ability to appropriately use life-saving therapies or select new therapeutic approaches that are likely to improve outcomes. This review aims to provide more guidance for the daily management of patients with cancer, in whom outcomes are constantly improving, as is our global ability to fight against what is becoming the leading cause of mortality in industrialized and non-industrialized countries.

Oncologists' and Intensivists' Attitudes Toward the Care of Critically Ill Patients with Cancer

BACKGROUND

Patients with cancer represent an important proportion of intensive care unit (ICU) admissions. Oncologists and intensivists have distinct knowledge backgrounds, and conflicts about the appropriate management of these patients may emerge.

METHODS

We surveyed oncologists and intensivists at 2 academic cancer centers regarding their management of 2 hypothetical patients with different cancer types (metastatic pancreatic cancer and metastatic breast cancer with positive receptors for estrogen, progesterone, and HER-2) who develop septic shock and multiple organ failure.

RESULTS

Sixty intensivists and 46 oncologists responded to the survey. Oncologists and intensivists similarly favored withdrawal of life support measures for the patient with pancreatic cancer (33/46 [72%] vs 48/60 [80%], P = .45). On the other hand, intensivists favored more withdrawal of life support measures for the patient with breast cancer compared to oncologists (32/59 [54%] vs 9/44 [21%], P < .001). In the multinomial logistic regression, the oncology specialists were more likely to advocate for a full-code status for the patient with breast cancer (OR = 5.931; CI 95%, 1.762-19.956; P = .004).

CONCLUSIONS

Oncologists and intensivists share different views regarding life support measures in critically ill patients with cancer. Oncologists tend to focus on the cancer characteristics, whereas intensivists focus on multiple organ failure when weighing in on the same decisions. Regular meetings between oncologists and intensivists may reduce possible conflicts regarding the critical care of patients with cancer.

Influence of Chemotherapy Within 30 Days Before ICU Admission on Mortality in Critically Ill Medical Patients With Cancer

BACKGROUND

The main objective was to determine whether the administration of chemotherapy (CT) during the month before intensive care unit (ICU) admission of medical patients with cancer influences the survival rate. The design was a single-institution observational cohort study in an ICU of a tertiary university hospital.

METHODS

Our cohort included 248 oncology patients admitted to the ICU from 2005 to 2014 due to nonsurgical problems. Seventy-six (30.6%) patients had received CT in the month before admission (CT group) and 172 did not receive CT (control group). The main outcome measures were ICU, hospital, 30-day, 90-day, and 1-year mortalities. We performed survival analysis using the Kaplan-Meier estimator, comparing both groups using the log-rank test, and multivariate analysis using Cox regression adjusted for gender, age, maximum Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA), and delta maximum SOFA to calculate the hazard ratios (HRs) and their respective 95% confidence intervals. This association was also evaluated by a graphic representation of survival.

RESULTS

The CT group presented an ICU mortality rate of 27.6% versus 25.5% in the control group. The multivariate analysis adjusted for age, sex, and delta maximum SOFA showed significant differences between the groups (HR: 2.12; P = .009). The hospital mortality rate was 55.3% in the CT group compared to 45.4% in the control group (adjusted HR: 1.81; P = .003). At 30 days, the mortality rate was 56.6% in the CT group compared to 46.5% in the control group (adjusted HR: 1.69; P = .008). Mortality at 90 days was 65.8% in the CT group versus 59.9% in the control group (adjusted HR: 1.47; P = .03). One-year mortality was also higher in the CT group (79% vs 72.7%, adjusted HR: 1.44; P = .02).

CONCLUSION

The administration of CT in the month before ICU admission in patients with cancer was associated with higher mortality in the ICU, in the hospital, and 30 and 90 days after admission when adjusted for the increase in organ failure measured by delta maximum SOFA. We provide useful new information for decision-making about ICU management of patients with cancer.

Critical Care Prognosis and Outcomes in Patients with Cancer

Advances in cancer treatment and patient survival are associated with increasing number of these patients requiring intensive care. Over the last 2 decades, there has been a steady improvement in the outcomes of critically ill patients with cancer. This review provides data on the use of the intensive care unit (ICU) and short and long-term outcomes of critically ill patients with cancer, the ICU system practices that influence patients outcomes, and the role of the different clinical variables in predicting the prognosis of these patients.