Development and validation of the VitaL CLASS score to predict mortality in stage IV solid cancer patients with septic shock in the emergency department: a multi-center, prospective cohort study

Septic shock in the immunocompromised cancer patient: a narrative review

Immunosuppressed patients, particularly those with cancer, represent a momentous and increasing portion of the population, especially as cancer incidence rises with population growth and aging. These patients are at a heightened risk of developing severe infections, including sepsis and septic shock, due to multiple immunologic defects such as neutropenia, lymphopenia, and T and B-cell impairment. The diverse and complex nature of these immunologic profiles, compounded by the concomitant use of immunosuppressive therapies (e.g., corticosteroids, cytotoxic drugs, and immunotherapy), superimposed by the breakage of natural protective barriers (e.g., mucosal damage, chronic indwelling catheters, and alterations of anatomical structures), increases the risk of various infections. These and other conditions that mimic sepsis pose substantial diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. Factors that elevate the risk of progression to septic shock in these patients include advanced age, pre-existing comorbidities, frailty, type of cancer, the severity of immunosuppression, hypoalbuminemia, hypophosphatemia, Gram-negative bacteremia, and type and timing of responses to initial treatment. The management of vulnerable cancer patients with sepsis or septic shock varies due to biased clinical practices that may result in delayed access to intensive care and worse outcomes. While septic shock is typically associated with poor outcomes in patients with malignancies, survival has significantly improved over time. Therefore, understanding and addressing the unique needs of cancer patients through a new paradigm, which includes the integration of innovative technologies into our healthcare system (e.g., wireless technologies, medical informatics, precision medicine), targeted management strategies, and robust clinical practices, including early identification and diagnosis, coupled with prompt admission to high-level care facilities that promote a multidisciplinary approach, is crucial for improving their prognosis and overall survival rates.

Neurosurgical treatment and outcome patterns in patients with meningioma in South Moravian region-a population-based study

INTRODUCTION

Meningiomas are usually slow-growing tumours, constituting about one third of all primary intracranial tumours. They occur more frequently in women. Clinical manifestation of meningiomas depends on their location, tumour size and growth rate. In most cases, surgical treatment is the procedure of choice. The success of this treatment is, however, associated with the radicality of the resection. Radiotherapy represents an additional or alternative treatment modality. Gamma knife surgery is another notable treatment method, especially in small and/or slow-growing tumours in eloquent areas or in elderly patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Authors describe their experience with the diagnosis, treatment and outcome of the patients with meningioma (n = 857). Furthermore, they also assess the postoperative morbidity/mortality and recurrence rate.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

In view of the benign histology of meningiomas, the success of the treatment largely depends (besides the tumour grading) on the radicality of the resection. The emphasis is also put on appropriate follow-up of the patients. In certain patients, the watch and wait strategy should be also considered as a suitable treatment method.

Prognostic Factors and Outcomes in Patients With Septic Shock After Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

Septic shock remains a potentially life-threatening complication among allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (allo-HSCT) recipients. There is a paucity of information on the clinical characteristics, outcome and prognostic factors of septic shock patients after allo-HSCT. We aimed to describe the clinical characteristics of septic shock after allo-HSCT and its associated health outcomes and to evaluate the role of patient demographics, transplantation-related laboratory and clinical variables associated with the short-term mortality of septic shock after allo-HSCT. We retrospectively studied 242 septic shock patients from 6105 consecutive patients allografted between 2007 and 2021. We assessed 29 risk factors as candidate predictors and used multivariable logistic regression to establish clinical model. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. The median age of the subjects was 34 (IQR 24 to 45) years. A total of 148 patients (61.2%) had positive blood cultures. Gram-negative bacilli accounted for 61.5% of the positive isolates, gram-positive cocci accounted for 12.2%, and fungi accounted for 6.1%. Coinfections were found in 30 (20.3%) patients. Escherichia coli was the dominant isolated pathogen (31.1%), followed by Pseudomonas spp. (12.8%) and Klebsiella pneumoniae (10.1%). With a median follow-up of 34 (IQR: 2 to 528) days, a total of 142 (58.7%) patients died, of whom 118 (48.8%) died within the first 28 days after septic shock diagnosis, 131 (54.1%) died within 90 days, and 141 (58.3%) died within 1 year. A large majority of deaths (83.1% [118/142]) occurred within 28 days of septic shock diagnosis. Finally, 6 independent predictive variables of 28-day mortality were identified by multivariable logistic regression: time of septic shock, albumin, bilirubin, PaO2/FiO2, lactate, and sepsis-induced coagulopathy. Patients with late onset shock had higher 28-day mortality rates (64.6% versus 25.5%, P < .001) and more ICU admission (32.6% versus 7.1%, P < .001) than those with early onset shock. We highlight the poor survival outcomes in patients who develop septic shock, emphasizing the need for increasing awareness regarding septic shock after allo-HSCT. The information from the current study may help to assist clinicians in identifying high-risk patients.

Risk Prediction of Emergency Department Visits in Patients With Lung Cancer Using Machine Learning: Retrospective Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Patients with lung cancer are among the most frequent visitors to emergency departments due to cancer-related problems, and the prognosis for those who seek emergency care is dismal. Given that patients with lung cancer frequently visit health care facilities for treatment or follow-up, the ability to predict emergency department visits based on clinical information gleaned from their routine visits would enhance hospital resource utilization and patient outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

This study proposed a machine learning-based prediction model to identify risk factors for emergency department visits by patients with lung cancer.

METHODS

This was a retrospective observational study of patients with lung cancer diagnosed at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, a tertiary general hospital in South Korea, between January 2010 and December 2017. The primary outcome was an emergency department visit within 30 days of an outpatient visit. This study developed a machine learning-based prediction model using a common data model. In addition, the importance of features that influenced the decision-making of the model output was analyzed to identify significant clinical factors.

RESULTS

The model with the best performance demonstrated an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.73 in its ability to predict the attendance of patients with lung cancer in emergency departments. The frequency of recent visits to the emergency department and several laboratory test results that are typically collected during cancer treatment follow-up visits were revealed as influencing factors for the model output.

CONCLUSIONS

This study developed a machine learning-based risk prediction model using a common data model and identified influencing factors for emergency department visits by patients with lung cancer. The predictive model contributes to the efficiency of resource utilization and health care service quality by facilitating the identification and early intervention of high-risk patients. This study demonstrated the possibility of collaborative research among different institutions using the common data model for precision medicine in lung cancer.

Lung cancer in the emergency department

Background

Though decreasing in incidence and mortality in the USA, lung cancer remains the deadliest of all cancers. For a significant number of patients, the emergency department (ED) provides the first pivotal step in lung cancer prevention, diagnosis, and management. As screening recommendations and treatments advance, ED providers must stay up-to-date with the latest lung cancer recommendations. The purpose of this review is to identify the many ways that emergency providers may intersect with the disease spectrum of lung cancer and provide an updated array of knowledge regarding detection, management, complications, and interdisciplinary care.

Findings

Lung cancer, encompassing 10-12% of cancer-related emergency department visits and a 66% admission rate, is the most fatal malignancy in both men and women. Most patients presenting to the ED have not seen a primary care provider or undergone screening. Ultimately, half of those with a new lung cancer diagnosis in the ED die within 1 year. Incidental findings on computed tomography are mostly benign, but emergency staff must be aware of the factors that make them high risk. Radiologic presentations range from asymptomatic nodules to diffuse metastatic lesions with predominately pulmonary symptoms, and some may present with extra-thoracic manifestations including neurologic. The short-term prognosis for ED lung cancer patients is worse than that of other malignancies. Screening offers new hope through earlier diagnosis but is underutilized which may be due to racial and socioeconomic disparities. New treatments provide optimism but lead to new complications, some long-term. Multidisciplinary care is essential, and emergency medicine is responsible for the disposition of patients to the appropriate specialists at inpatient and outpatient centers.

Conclusion

ED providers are intimately involved in all aspects of lung cancer care. Risk factor modification and referral for lung cancer screening are opportunities to further enhance patient care. In addition, with the advent of newer cancer therapies, ED providers must stay vigilant and up-to-date with all aspects of lung cancer including disparities, staging, symptoms of disease, prognosis, treatment, and therapy-related complications.

Machine Learning Model Development and Validation for Predicting Outcome in Stage 4 Solid Cancer Patients with Septic Shock Visiting the Emergency Department: A Multi-Center, Prospective Cohort Study

A reliable prognostic score for minimizing futile treatments in advanced cancer patients with septic shock is rare. A machine learning (ML) model to classify the risk of advanced cancer patients with septic shock is proposed and compared with the existing scoring systems. A multi-center, retrospective, observational study of the septic shock registry in patients with stage 4 cancer was divided into a training set and a test set in a 7:3 ratio. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. The best ML model was determined using a stratified 10-fold cross-validation in the training set. A total of 897 patients were included, and the 28-day mortality was 26.4%. The best ML model in the training set was balanced random forest (BRF), with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.821 to predict 28-day mortality. The AUC of the BRF to predict the 28-day mortality in the test set was 0.859. The AUC of the BRF was significantly higher than those of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score and the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score (both p < 0.001). The ML model outperformed the existing scores for predicting 28-day mortality in stage 4 cancer patients with septic shock. However, further studies are needed to improve the prediction algorithm and to validate it in various countries. This model might support clinicians in real-time to adopt appropriate levels of care.

Prognostic Impact of Neutropenia in Cancer Patients with Septic Shock: A 2009–2017 Nationwide Cohort Study

Simple Summary

The prognostic impact of neutropenia on mortality in cancer patients with septic shock remains controversial despite recent advances in cancer and sepsis management. This study aimed to determine whether neutropenia could be related to an increase in short-term and long-term mortality. This population-based, case–control study used data from the National Health Insurance Service of Korea. Adult cancer patients who presented to the emergency department with septic shock from 2009 to 2017 were analyzed. The 30-day and 1-year mortality rates were evaluated as short-term and long-term outcomes. After adjustment for confounders, neutropenia was independently associated with decreased 30-day and 1-year mortality rates. Neutropenia did not increase mortality in cancer patients with septic shock, suggesting that neutropenia may not be used as a single triage criterion for withholding intensive care in cancer patients presenting to the emergency department with septic shock.

Abstract

(1) Background: Neutropenia’s prognostic impact on mortality in cancer patients with septic shock remains controversial despite recent advances in cancer and sepsis management. This population-based, case–control study aimed to determine whether neutropenia could be related to an increase in short-term and long-term mortality. (2) Methods: This population-based, case–control study used data from the National Health Insurance Service of Korea. Adult cancer patients who presented to the emergency department with septic shock from 2009 to 2017 were included. The 30-day and 1-year mortality rates were evaluated as short-term and long-term outcomes. Cox proportional hazard regression was performed after adjusting for age, sex, Charlson comorbidity index, and neutropenia. (3) Results: In 43,466 adult cancer patients with septic shock, the 30-day and 1-year mortality rates were 52.1% and 81.3%, respectively. In total, 6391 patients had neutropenic septic shock, and the prevalent cancer type was lung cancer, followed by leukemia, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, stomach cancer, and colon cancer. Furthermore, 30-day and 1-year mortality was lower in patients with neutropenia than in those without neutropenia. After adjustment for confounders, neutropenia was independently associated with decreased 30-day and 1-year mortality rates. (4) Conclusions: In cancer patients presenting to the emergency department with septic shock, the presence of neutropenia did not increase mortality. This suggests that neutropenia may not be used as a single triage criterion for withholding intensive care in cancer patients presenting to the emergency department with septic shock.

Prognostic factors for late death in septic shock survivors: a multi-center, prospective, registry-based observational study

Septic shock patients who survive past the acute period are associated with an increased risk of long-term mortality. However, factors for predicting late death remain unclear. We aimed to investigate the prognostic factors associated with late mortality in septic shock patients with 28-day survival after admission. This retrospective observational study used a prospective, multi-center registry of septic shock patients between October 2015 and December 2019 involving 12 emergency departments (EDs) from the Korean Shock Society. Adult septic shock patients visiting the ED with 28-day survival after admission were included. Among 4624 septic shock patients, 3588 (77.6%) who survived past day 28 were analyzed. The 90-day mortality rate was 14.2%. Non-survivors were older (66.8 vs. 68.9 years; p = 0.032) and had higher lactate levels (3.7 vs. 4.0 mmol/L; p = 0.028) than survivors. Pulmonary and hepatobiliary infections and a history of malignancy (27.7 vs. 57.5%; p < 0.001) were more frequent in the non-survivor group than in the survivor group. Independent risk factors for late death on multivariate regression analysis were age; malignancy; and hemoglobin, blood urea nitrogen, and albumin levels. The length of intensive care unit stay and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score were independently associated with late death. Approximately, one-seventh of septic shock patients who survived past day 28 of admission died by day 90. Physicians must pay attention to survivors with these risk factors during the post-acute period as they have an increased mortality risk.

Short and Long-Term Mortality Trends for Cancer Patients with Septic Shock Stratified by Cancer Type from 2009 to 2017: A Population-Based Cohort Study

Simple Summary

This study aimed to assess short and long-term mortality trends in cancer patients with septic shock from 2009 to 2017. Among 43,466 adult cancer patients with septic shock (90% solid and 10% hematologic cancer cases) who presented at an emergency department (ED) in Korea between 2009 and 2017, the 30-day and 1-year mortality rates were 52.1% and 81.3%, respectively. The overall 30-day mortality decreased by 4.8% annually from 2013 to 2017, whereas the 1-year mortality only showed a 1.9% annual decrease over this same period. Pancreatic cancer cases showed the most significant improvement in the 30-day mortality since 2014, and lung and stomach cancer showed a sustained decrease in this metric during the whole study period. The outcomes of cancer patients with septic shock have improved in recent years across most cancer types. Physicians should have expectations of improved prognoses in cancer patients admitted to the ED with septic shock.

Abstract

There have been recent advances in both cancer and sepsis management. This study aimed to assess short and long-term mortality trends in cancer patients with septic shock from 2009 to 2017 by cancer type. This nationwide population-based cohort study using data from the National Health Insurance Service of Korea included adult cancer patients who presented to an emergency department (ED) with septic shock from 2009 to 2017. Among 43,466 adult cancer patients with septic shock (90% solid and 10% hematologic cancer cases), the 30-day and 1-year mortality rates were 52.1% and 81.3%, respectively. The overall 30-day mortality showed a marked decrease of 4.8% annually from 2013 to 2017, but the annual decrease in the 1-year mortality over the same period was only 1.9%. Pancreatic cancer cases showed the most significant improvement in 30-day mortality between 2014 and 2019 (11.0% decrease/year). Lung and stomach cancers showed a sustained decrease in 30-day mortality during the whole study period (1.7% and 2.0% decrease/year, respectively). The outcomes of cancer patients with septic shock have improved in recent years across most cancer types. Physicians should have expectations of an improved prognosis in cancer patients admitted to the ED with septic shock.