PURPOSE: The prognosis of critically ill cancer patients has improved recently. Controversies remain as regard to the specific prognosis impact of neutropenia in critically ill cancer patients. The primary objective of this study was to assess hospital outcome of critically ill neutropenic cancer patients admitted into the ICU. The secondary objective was to assess risk factors for unfavorable outcome in this population of patients and specific impact of neutropenia. METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis of a prospectively collected database. The study was carried out in 17 university or university-affiliated centers in France and Belgium. Neutropenia was defined as a neutrophil count lower than 500/mm(3). RESULTS: Among the 1,011 patients admitted into the ICU during the study period 289 were neutropenic at the time of admission. Overall, 131 patients died during their hospital stay (hospital mortality 45.3 %). Four variables were associated with a poor outcome, namely allogeneic transplantation (OR 3.83; 95 % CI 1.75-8.35), need for mechanical ventilation (MV) (OR 6.57; 95 % CI 3.51-12.32), microbiological documentation (OR 2.33; CI 1.27-4.26), and need for renal replacement therapy (OR 2.77; 95 % CI 1.34-5.74). Two variables were associated with hospital survival, namely age younger than 70 (OR 0.22; 95 % CI 0.1-0.52) and neutropenic enterocolitis (OR 0.37; 95 % CI 0.15-0.9). A case-control analysis was also performed with patients of the initial database; after adjustment, neutropenia was not associated with hospital mortality (OR 1.27; 95 % CI 0.86-1.89). CONCLUSION: Hospital survival was closely associated with younger age and neutropenic enterocolitis. Conversely, need for conventional MV, for renal replacement therapy, and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) were associated with poor outcome.
PURPOSE: The prognosis of critically ill cancerpatients has improved recently. Controversies remain as regard to the specific prognosis impact of neutropenia in critically ill cancerpatients. The primary objective of this study was to assess hospital outcome of critically ill neutropenic cancerpatients admitted into the ICU. The secondary objective was to assess risk factors for unfavorable outcome in this population of patients and specific impact of neutropenia. METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis of a prospectively collected database. The study was carried out in 17 university or university-affiliated centers in France and Belgium. Neutropenia was defined as a neutrophil count lower than 500/mm(3). RESULTS: Among the 1,011 patients admitted into the ICU during the study period 289 were neutropenic at the time of admission. Overall, 131 patients died during their hospital stay (hospital mortality 45.3 %). Four variables were associated with a poor outcome, namely allogeneic transplantation (OR 3.83; 95 % CI 1.75-8.35), need for mechanical ventilation (MV) (OR 6.57; 95 % CI 3.51-12.32), microbiological documentation (OR 2.33; CI 1.27-4.26), and need for renal replacement therapy (OR 2.77; 95 % CI 1.34-5.74). Two variables were associated with hospital survival, namely age younger than 70 (OR 0.22; 95 % CI 0.1-0.52) and neutropenic enterocolitis (OR 0.37; 95 % CI 0.15-0.9). A case-control analysis was also performed with patients of the initial database; after adjustment, neutropenia was not associated with hospital mortality (OR 1.27; 95 % CI 0.86-1.89). CONCLUSION: Hospital survival was closely associated with younger age and neutropenic enterocolitis. Conversely, need for conventional MV, for renal replacement therapy, and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) were associated with poor outcome.
Authors: T Berghmans; M Paesmans; J J Lafitte; C Mascaux; A P Meert; C Jacquy; A Burniat; E Steels; F Vallot; J P Sculier Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2001-11-23 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Ricard Ferrer; Antonio Artigas; Mitchell M Levy; Jesús Blanco; Gumersindo González-Díaz; José Garnacho-Montero; Jordi Ibáñez; Eduardo Palencia; Manuel Quintana; María Victoria de la Torre-Prados Journal: JAMA Date: 2008-05-21 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Ben De Pauw; Thomas J Walsh; J Peter Donnelly; David A Stevens; John E Edwards; Thierry Calandra; Peter G Pappas; Johan Maertens; Olivier Lortholary; Carol A Kauffman; David W Denning; Thomas F Patterson; Georg Maschmeyer; Jacques Bille; William E Dismukes; Raoul Herbrecht; William W Hope; Christopher C Kibbler; Bart Jan Kullberg; Kieren A Marr; Patricia Muñoz; Frank C Odds; John R Perfect; Angela Restrepo; Markus Ruhnke; Brahm H Segal; Jack D Sobel; Tania C Sorrell; Claudio Viscoli; John R Wingard; Theoklis Zaoutis; John E Bennett Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2008-06-15 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Elie Azoulay; Peter Schellongowski; Michael Darmon; Philippe R Bauer; Dominique Benoit; Pieter Depuydt; Jigeeshu V Divatia; Virginie Lemiale; Maarten van Vliet; Anne-Pascale Meert; Djamel Mokart; Stephen M Pastores; Anders Perner; Frédéric Pène; Peter Pickkers; Kathryn A Puxty; Francois Vincent; Jorge Salluh; Ayman O Soubani; Massimo Antonelli; Thomas Staudinger; Michael von Bergwelt-Baildon; Marcio Soares Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2017-07-19 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Viviane B L Torres; Juliana Vassalo; Ulysses V A Silva; Pedro Caruso; André P Torelly; Eliezer Silva; José M M Teles; Marcos Knibel; Ederlon Rezende; José J S Netto; Claudio Piras; Luciano C P Azevedo; Fernando A Bozza; Nelson Spector; Jorge I F Salluh; Marcio Soares Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-10-20 Impact factor: 3.240