The time has come for new models in febrile neutropenia: a practical demonstration of the inadequacy of the MASCC score.

Since its publication more than 15 years ago, the MASCC score has been internationally validated any number of times and recommended by most clinical practice guidelines for the management of febrile neutropenia (FN) around the world. We have used an empirical data-supported simulated scenario to demonstrate that, despite everything, the MASCC score is impractical as a basis for decision-making. A detailed analysis of reasons supporting the clinical irrelevance of this model is performed. First, seven of its eight variables are "innocent bystanders" that contribute little to selecting low-risk candidates for ambulatory management. Secondly, the training series was hardly representative of outpatients with solid tumors and low-risk FN. Finally, the simultaneous inclusion of key variables both in the model and in the outcome explains its successful validation in various series of patients. Alternative methods of prognostic classification, such as the Clinical Index of Stable Febrile Neutropenia, have been specifically validated for patients with solid tumors and should replace the MASCC model in situations of clinical uncertainty.