» Articles » PMID: 35838022

Internal Evaluation of Risk Stratification Tool Using Serial Procalcitonin and Clinical Risk Factors in Pediatric Febrile Neutropenia: The Non-interventional, Single Institution Experience Prior to Clinical Implementation

Overview
Publisher Informa Healthcare
Specialty Pediatrics
Date 2022 Jul 15
PMID 35838022
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Risk stratification of pediatric febrile neutropenia (FN) is an established concept, yet clinical risk tools misclassify nearly 5% of clinical standard-risk episodes with severe outcomes. The internal evaluation of a clinical risk tool before implementation has not been well-described. In this noninterventional cohort study, we evaluated a study decision rules (SDR) tool; a clinical risk tool with serial procalcitonin. The study standard-risk (SSR) group met clinical standard-risk criteria with two serial procalcitonin <0.4 ng/mL. The study high-risk (SHR) group met clinical high-risk criteria or clinical standard-risk with a procalcitonin ≥0.4 ng/mL. Descriptive and bivariate statistics compared the groups and outcomes. Clinical criteria alone identified 39.1% (238/608) standard-risk episodes; 5.9% (14/238) had severe events. Prospectively using the SDR, the SHR group encompassed 76.6% (92/120) of episodes; severe events occurred in 20% (3/15) of standard-risk episodes included due to elevated procalcitonin ≥0.4 ng/mL. The SHR group had more blood stream infections [21.7% (20/92) vs. 0% (0/28);  = 0.007] and intensive care admissions [13% (12/92) vs. 3.6% (1/28);  = 0.158]. In conclusion, the SDR with serial procalcitonin aided in identifying severe events in clinical standard-risk episodes, but analysis was limited. Institutions may consider similar internal evaluation methodology before FN episode risk stratification.

Citing Articles

"Better at home": Mixed methods report of intricacies in pediatric febrile neutropenia management.

Smeallie E, Choi S, Mody R, Guetterman T, Nessle C Cancer Med. 2024; 13(6):e7106.

PMID: 38506249 PMC: 10952020. DOI: 10.1002/cam4.7106.


Joint Display of Integrated Data Collection for Mixed Methods Research: An Illustration From a Pediatric Oncology Quality Improvement Study.

Nessle C, Ghazal L, Choi S, Fetters M Ann Fam Med. 2023; 21(4):347-357.

PMID: 37487720 PMC: 10365872. DOI: 10.1370/afm.2985.

References
1.
Taplitz R, Kennedy E, Flowers C . Outpatient Management of Fever and Neutropenia in Adults Treated for Malignancy: American Society of Clinical Oncology and Infectious Diseases Society of America Clinical Practice Guideline Update Summary. J Oncol Pract. 2018; 14(4):250-255. DOI: 10.1200/JOP.18.00016. View

2.
Vidal L, Ben Dor I, Paul M, Eliakim-Raz N, Pokroy E, Soares-Weiser K . Oral versus intravenous antibiotic treatment for febrile neutropenia in cancer patients. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013; (10):CD003992. PMC: 6457615. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003992.pub3. View

3.
Morgan J, Cleminson J, Atkin K, Stewart L, Phillips R . Systematic review of reduced therapy regimens for children with low risk febrile neutropenia. Support Care Cancer. 2016; 24(6):2651-60. DOI: 10.1007/s00520-016-3074-9. View

4.
Arif T, Phillips R . Updated systematic review and meta-analysis of the predictive value of serum biomarkers in the assessment and management of fever during neutropenia in children with cancer. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2019; 66(10):e27887. DOI: 10.1002/pbc.27887. View

5.
Baden L, Swaminathan S, Angarone M, Blouin G, Camins B, Casper C . Prevention and Treatment of Cancer-Related Infections, Version 2.2016, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2016; 14(7):882-913. DOI: 10.6004/jnccn.2016.0093. View