BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines recommend risk stratification of patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE). Active cancer increases risk of PE and worsens prognosis, but also causes incidental PE that may be discovered during cancer staging. No quantitative decision instrument has been derived specifically for patients with active cancer and PE. METHODS: Classification and regression technique was used to reduce 25 variables prospectively collected from 408 patients with AC and PE. Selected variables were transformed into a logistic regression model, termed POMPE-C, and compared with the pulmonary embolism severity index (PESI) score to predict the outcome variable of death within 30 days. Validation was performed in an independent sample of 182 patients with active cancer and PE. RESULTS: POMPE-C included eight predictors: body mass, heart rate >100, respiratory rate, SaO2%, respiratory distress, altered mental status, do not resuscitate status, and unilateral limb swelling. In the derivation set, the area under the ROC curve for POMPE-C was 0.84 (95% CI: 0.82-0.87), significantly greater than PESI (0.68, 0.60-0.76). In the validation sample, POMPE-C had an AUC of 0.86 (0.78-0.93). No patient with POMPE-C estimate ≤ 5% died within 30 days (0/50, 0-7%), whereas 10/13 (77%, 46-95%) with POMPE-C estimate >50% died within 30 days. CONCLUSION: In patients with active cancer and PE, POMPE-C demonstrated good prognostic accuracy for 30 day mortality and better performance than PESI. If validated in a large sample, POMPE-C may provide a quantitative basis to decide treatment options for PE discovered during cancer staging and with advanced cancer.
BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines recommend risk stratification of patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE). Active cancer increases risk of PE and worsens prognosis, but also causes incidental PE that may be discovered during cancer staging. No quantitative decision instrument has been derived specifically for patients with active cancer and PE. METHODS: Classification and regression technique was used to reduce 25 variables prospectively collected from 408 patients with AC and PE. Selected variables were transformed into a logistic regression model, termed POMPE-C, and compared with the pulmonary embolism severity index (PESI) score to predict the outcome variable of death within 30 days. Validation was performed in an independent sample of 182 patients with active cancer and PE. RESULTS:POMPE-C included eight predictors: body mass, heart rate >100, respiratory rate, SaO2%, respiratory distress, altered mental status, do not resuscitate status, and unilateral limb swelling. In the derivation set, the area under the ROC curve for POMPE-C was 0.84 (95% CI: 0.82-0.87), significantly greater than PESI (0.68, 0.60-0.76). In the validation sample, POMPE-C had an AUC of 0.86 (0.78-0.93). No patient with POMPE-C estimate ≤ 5% died within 30 days (0/50, 0-7%), whereas 10/13 (77%, 46-95%) with POMPE-C estimate >50% died within 30 days. CONCLUSION: In patients with active cancer and PE, POMPE-C demonstrated good prognostic accuracy for 30 day mortality and better performance than PESI. If validated in a large sample, POMPE-C may provide a quantitative basis to decide treatment options for PE discovered during cancer staging and with advanced cancer.
Authors: Jeffrey A Kline; Jackeline Hernandez-Nino; Geoffrey A Rose; H James Norton; Carlos A Camargo Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2006-11 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Casey L O'Connell; William D Boswell; Vinay Duddalwar; Amy Caton; Lisa S Mark; Cheryl Vigen; Howard A Liebman Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-10-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: W Kasper; S Konstantinides; A Geibel; M Olschewski; F Heinrich; K D Grosser; K Rauber; S Iversen; M Redecker; J Kienast Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 1997-11-01 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Drahomir Aujesky; D Scott Obrosky; Roslyn A Stone; Thomas E Auble; Arnaud Perrier; Jacques Cornuz; Pierre-Marie Roy; Michael J Fine Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2005-07-14 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Jeffrey A Kline; Charles L Johnson; Charles V Pollack; Deborah B Diercks; Judd E Hollander; Craig D Newgard; J Lee Garvey Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2005-08-11 Impact factor: 2.796
Authors: Kali S Thomas; Jessica A Ogarek; Joan M Teno; Pedro L Gozalo; Vincent Mor Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2019-01-16 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: A Carmona-Bayonas; M Sánchez-Cánovas; J M Plasencia; A Custodio; E Martínez de Castro; J A Virizuela; F Ayala de la Peña; P Jiménez-Fonseca Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2017-06-07 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: Diego Muñoz-Guglielmetti; Tim Cooksley; Shin Ahn; Carmen Beato; Mario Aramberri; Carmen Escalante; Carme Font Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2022-05-17 Impact factor: 3.359
Authors: June Palmer; George Bozas; Andrew Stephens; Miriam Johnson; Ged Avery; Lorcan O'Toole; Anthony Maraveyas Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2013-06-27 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: A J Muñoz Martín; C Font Puig; L M Navarro Martín; P Borrega García; M Martín Jiménez Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2014-11-01 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: Jeffrey A Kline; David H Adler; Naomi Alanis; Joseph R Bledsoe; Daniel M Courtney; James P d'Etienne; Deborah B Diercks; John S Garrett; Alan E Jones; David C Mackenzie; Troy Madsen; Andrew J Matuskowitz; Bryn E Mumma; Kristen E Nordenholz; Justine Pagenhardt; Michael S Runyon; William B Stubblefield; Christopher B Willoughby Journal: Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes Date: 2021-06-21