Application of EBMT, MASCC, and qSOFA Scores to Predict Complicated Febrile Neutropenia and Mortality in Autologous Stem Cell Transplant Recipients.

Q1 Medicine
Tiago A Barros, Rony Schaffel, Geraldo S de Azevedo Neto, Bianca de Lucena Gaio, Arthur T Batista, Marcia R Valentim, Angelo Maiolino, Marcia Garnica
{"title":"Application of EBMT, MASCC, and qSOFA Scores to Predict Complicated Febrile Neutropenia and Mortality in Autologous Stem Cell Transplant Recipients.","authors":"Tiago A Barros,&nbsp;Rony Schaffel,&nbsp;Geraldo S de Azevedo Neto,&nbsp;Bianca de Lucena Gaio,&nbsp;Arthur T Batista,&nbsp;Marcia R Valentim,&nbsp;Angelo Maiolino,&nbsp;Marcia Garnica","doi":"10.56875/2589-0646.1034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Three different scores were addressed as predictors of outcomes in autologous stem cell transplant (Auto SCT): one was calculated by pretransplant characteristics (European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation [EBMT] risk score), and two were calculated at the onset of febrile neutropenia (Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer [MASCC] and Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment [qSOFA]). We considered bloodstream infection (BSI), carbapenem prescription, admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), and mortality as outcomes.</p><p><strong>Patients: </strong>A total of 309 patients with a median age of 54 years were enrolled.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Patients with EBMT score ≥4 (EBMT 4+) had higher ICU rates (14% vs. 4%; p < 0.01) and more carbapenem prescriptions (61% vs. 38%; p < 0.001) than those with EBMT score <4. MASCC <21 points (MASCC HR) was associated with carbapenem prescription (59% vs. 44%; p = 0.013), ICU (19% vs. 3%; p < 0.01), and death (4% vs. 0; p = 0.014). Patients with at least two points by qSOFA (qSOFA 2+) had more frequent BSI (55% vs. 22%; p = 0.03), ICU admissions (73% vs. 7; p < 0.01), and death (18% vs. 0.7, p = 0.02). EBMT 4+ and MASCC HR achieved the best sensitivities for ICU. For death, the best sensitivity was obtained with MASCC.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In conclusion, risk scores for Auto SCT showed an association with outcomes and had different performances when combined or used alone. Therefore, risk scores for Auto SCT are useful in supportive care and clinical surveillance in stem cell transplant recipients.</p>","PeriodicalId":39226,"journal":{"name":"Hematology/ Oncology and Stem Cell Therapy","volume":"16 4","pages":"370-378"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hematology/ Oncology and Stem Cell Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56875/2589-0646.1034","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objectives: Three different scores were addressed as predictors of outcomes in autologous stem cell transplant (Auto SCT): one was calculated by pretransplant characteristics (European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation [EBMT] risk score), and two were calculated at the onset of febrile neutropenia (Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer [MASCC] and Quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment [qSOFA]). We considered bloodstream infection (BSI), carbapenem prescription, admission to the intensive care unit (ICU), and mortality as outcomes.

Patients: A total of 309 patients with a median age of 54 years were enrolled.

Results: Patients with EBMT score ≥4 (EBMT 4+) had higher ICU rates (14% vs. 4%; p < 0.01) and more carbapenem prescriptions (61% vs. 38%; p < 0.001) than those with EBMT score <4. MASCC <21 points (MASCC HR) was associated with carbapenem prescription (59% vs. 44%; p = 0.013), ICU (19% vs. 3%; p < 0.01), and death (4% vs. 0; p = 0.014). Patients with at least two points by qSOFA (qSOFA 2+) had more frequent BSI (55% vs. 22%; p = 0.03), ICU admissions (73% vs. 7; p < 0.01), and death (18% vs. 0.7, p = 0.02). EBMT 4+ and MASCC HR achieved the best sensitivities for ICU. For death, the best sensitivity was obtained with MASCC.

Conclusion: In conclusion, risk scores for Auto SCT showed an association with outcomes and had different performances when combined or used alone. Therefore, risk scores for Auto SCT are useful in supportive care and clinical surveillance in stem cell transplant recipients.

应用EBMT、MASCC和qSOFA评分预测自体干细胞移植受者并发发热性中性粒细胞减少症和死亡率。
背景和目的:三种不同的评分被认为是自体干细胞移植(Auto SCT)预后的预测指标:一种是通过移植前特征计算的(欧洲血液和骨髓移植协会[EBMT]风险评分),另一种是在发热性中性粒细胞减少的发病时计算的(多国癌症支持护理协会[MASCC]和快速序贯器官衰竭评估协会[qSOFA])。我们将血流感染(BSI)、碳青霉烯类药物处方、入住重症监护病房(ICU)和死亡率作为结局。患者:共入组309例患者,中位年龄54岁。结果:EBMT评分≥4 (EBMT 4+)的患者ICU发生率较高(14% vs. 4%;P < 0.01)和更多的碳青霉烯类处方(61%∶38%;p < 0.001)结论:综上所述,Auto SCT的风险评分与预后相关,并且在联合或单独使用时具有不同的表现。因此,自体SCT的风险评分在干细胞移植受者的支持性护理和临床监测中是有用的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
27 weeks
期刊介绍: Hematology Oncology and Stem Cell Therapy is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal that provides a vehicle for publications of high-quality clinical as well as basic science research reports in hematology and oncology. The contents of the journal also emphasize the growing importance of hematopoietic stem cell therapy for treatment of various benign and malignant hematologic disorders and certain solid tumors.The journal prioritizes publication of original research articles but also would give consideration for brief reports, review articles, special communications, and unique case reports. It also offers a special section for clinically relevant images that provide an important educational value.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信