Dataset Information

Development and Validation of a Risk Score for Febrile Neutropenia After Chemotherapy in Patients With Cancer: The FENCE Score.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Febrile neutropenia (FN) after chemotherapy causes a high burden of morbidity and mortality. We aimed to develop and validate a risk score to predict FN in the first cycle of chemotherapy.

Methods

We included patients with solid cancers and diffuse large B-cell lymphomas at Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, 2010-2016. Predictors of FN were analyzed using Poisson regression and random split-sampling.

Results

Among 6294 patients in the derivation cohort, 360 developed FN. Female sex, older age, cancer type, disease stage, low albumin, elevated bilirubin, low creatinine clearance, infection before chemotherapy, and number of and type of chemotherapy drugs predicted FN. Compared with those at low risk (n?=?2520, 40.0%), the incidence rate ratio of developing FN was 4.8 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.9 to 8.1), 8.7 (95% CI = 5.3 to 14.1) and 24.0 (95% CI = 15.2 to 38.0) in the intermediate (n?=?1294, 20.6%), high (n?=?1249, 19.8%) and very high (n?=?1231, 19.6%) risk groups, respectively, corresponding to a number needed to treat with granulocyte colony-stimulating factors to avoid one FN event in the first cycle of 284, 60, 34 and 14. The discriminatory ability (Harrell's C-statistic = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.78 to 0.82) was similar in the validation cohort (n?=?3163) (0.79, 95% CI = 0.75 to 0.82).

Conclusion

We developed and internally validated a risk score for FN in the first cycle of chemotherapy. The FENCE score is available online and provides good differentiation of risk groups.

SUBMITTER: Aagaard T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6649794 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Development and Validation of a Risk Score for Febrile Neutropenia After Chemotherapy in Patients With Cancer: The FENCE Score.

Aagaard Theis T Roen Ashley A Reekie Joanne J Daugaard Gedske G Brown Peter de Nully PN Specht Lena L Sengeløv Henrik H Mocroft Amanda A Lundgren Jens J Helleberg Marie M

JNCI cancer spectrum 20181001 4

<h4>Background</h4>Febrile neutropenia (FN) after chemotherapy causes a high burden of morbidity and mortality. We aimed to develop and validate a risk score to predict FN in the first cycle of chemotherapy.<h4>Methods</h4>We included patients with solid cancers and diffuse large B-cell lymphomas at Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, 2010-2016. Predictors of FN were analyzed using Poisson regression and random split-sampling.<h4>Results</h4>Among 6294 patients in the derivation cohort, 36 ...[more]

PMID: 31360873

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe 2011 4th European Conference on Infections in Leukemia (ECIL4) guidelines recommend antibiotics de-escalation/discontinuation in selected febrile neutropenia (FN) patients. We aimed to assess the impact of an antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) program based on these guidelines on antibiotics use and clinical outcomes in high-risk FN patients.MethodsWe conducted an observational study in the hematology department of Cochin University Hospital in Paris, France. An ECIL4-based antibiotics de-escalation and discontinuation strategy was implemented jointly by the hematologists and the AMS team. The pre-intervention (January-October 2018) and post-intervention (January-October 2019) periods were compared. We retrospectively collected clinical and microbiological data. We compiled antibiotics consumptions via hospital pharmacy data and standardized them by calculating defined daily doses per 1000 patient-days. We analyzed the two-monthly antibiotic consumption using an interrupted time series method and built a composite endpoint for clinical outcomes based on transfer to the intensive care unit (ICU) and/or hospital death.ResultsOverall, 273 hospital stays (164 patients) in the pre-intervention and 217 (148 patients) in the post-intervention periods were analyzed. Patients were mainly hospitalized for intensive chemotherapy for acute leukemia or autologous stem-cell transplant for myeloma. Patients were slightly younger in the pre-intervention compared to the post-intervention period (median age 60.4 vs 65.2 years, p = 0.049), but otherwise comparable. After implementation of the AMS program, glycopeptide and carbapenem use decreased by 85% (p = 0.03) and 72% (p = 0.04), respectively. After adjustment on confounders, the risk of transfer to the ICU/death decreased significantly after implementation of the AMS program (post-intervention period: odds-ratio = 0.29, 95% Confidence Interval: 0.15-0.53, p < 0.001).ConclusionImplementation of a multidisciplinary AMS program for high-risk neutropenic patients was associated with lower carbapenem and glycopeptide use and improved clinical outcomes.

Project description:ObjectiveInappropriate granulocyte colony-stimulating factor use with myelosuppressive chemotherapy has been reported. Using the Oncology Services Comprehensive Electronic Records electronic medical record database, prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (pegfilgrastim/filgrastim) use in cancer patients was assessed by febrile neutropenia risk level.MethodsPatients with nonmetastatic or metastatic breast, head/neck, colorectal, ovarian/gynecologic, lung cancer, or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma who received myelosuppressive chemotherapy from June 2013 to May 2014 were included. Prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor use with high-risk, intermediate-risk, and low-risk chemotherapy and distribution of National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk factors with intermediate-risk regimens were assessed.ResultsOverall, 86,189 patients received ?4.2 million chemotherapy cycles (high risk, 9%; intermediate risk, 48%; low risk, 43%). Prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor was given in 24% of cycles (high risk, 59%; intermediate risk, 29%; low risk, 11%). For nonmetastatic solid tumors, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor was given in 78% (high risk), 31% (intermediate risk), and 6% (low risk) of cycles. For metastatic solid tumors or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor was given in 50% (high risk), 27% (intermediate risk), and 11% (low risk) of cycles. Among patients receiving intermediate-risk regimens with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, febrile neutropenia risk factors were identified in 56% (95% confidence interval, 51.1-60.9%) of patients with nonmetastatic solid tumors (n?=?400) and in 70% (64.5-73.5%) of patients with metastatic solid tumors or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (n?=?400).ConclusionProphylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor use was appropriately highest for high-risk regimens and lowest for low-risk regimens yet still potentially underused in high risk regimens, overused in low-risk regimens, and not appropriately targeted in intermediate-risk regimens, indicating a need for further education on febrile neutropenia risk evaluation and appropriate granulocyte colony-stimulating factor use.

Dataset Information

Development and Validation of a Risk Score for Febrile Neutropenia After Chemotherapy in Patients With Cancer: The FENCE Score.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Development and Validation of a Risk Score for Febrile Neutropenia After Chemotherapy in Patients With Cancer: The FENCE Score.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets