ArticleCancer epidemiology2018
A prospective study of cancer survivors and risk of sepsis within the REGARDS cohort.
Article in Cancer epidemiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04673890 (Improving Cancer Survival and Reducing Treatment Variations With Protocols for Emergency Care), which is not on this map. Cited by 21 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Improving Cancer Survival and Reducing Treatment Variations With Protocols for Emergency Care (ICARE)
Who cites it
21 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Risk Factors for Adverse Outcomes in Cancer Patients With Sepsis.Journal of clinical medicine research · 2026Article
- Long-Term Risk of Pneumonia Among Gastric Cancer Survivors: A Nationwide Population-Based Cohort Study.Cancers · 2025Article
- The Overlapping Biology of Sepsis and Cancer and Therapeutic Implications.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Be-SNAP: the Belgian Sepsis National Action Plan.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Personalized ICU mortality assessment by interpretable machine learning algorithms in patients with sepsis combined lung cancer: a population-based study and an external validation cohort.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Observational
- Association of racial residential segregation with all-cause and cancer-specific mortality in the reasons for geographic and racial differences in stroke (REGARDS) cohort study.SSM - population health · 2023Article
- Epidemiology, Clinical Features, and Antimicrobial Resistance of InvasiveOpen forum infectious diseases · 2023Article
- Development and validation of a nomogram for predicting the prognosis in cancer patients with sepsis.Cancer medicine · 2022Article
- A 12-year study evaluating the outcomes and predictors of mortality in critically ill cancer patients admitted with septic shock.BMC cancer · 2021Article
- Excess cost of care associated with sepsis in cancer patients: Results from a population-based case-control matched cohort.PloS one · 2021Article
- Validation of a machine learning algorithm for early severe sepsis prediction: a retrospective study predicting severe sepsis up to 48 h in advance using a diverse dataset from 461 US hospitals.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2020Article
- Sepsis-associated pathways segregate cancer groups.BMC cancer · 2020Article
- Late infectious complications in hematopoietic cell transplantation survivors: a population-based study.Blood advances · 2020Article
- Long-term prognosis of septic shock in cancer patients.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2020Article
- Past history of stage I/II solid tumor malignancy impacts considerably on sepsis mortality: a propensity score matching analysis from the hellenic sepsis study group.BMC infectious diseases · 2019Article
- Management of sepsis in neutropenic cancer patients: 2018 guidelines from the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) and Intensive Care Working Party (iCHOP) of the German Society of Hematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO).Annals of hematology · 2019Review
- Central venous oxygen saturation is not predictive of early complications in cancer patients presenting to the emergency department.Internal and emergency medicine · 2019Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHospitalized cancer patients are nearly 10 times more likely to develop sepsis when compared to patients with no cancer history. We compared the risk of sepsis between cancer survivors and no cancer history participants, and examined whether race was an effect modifier.
methodsWe performed a prospective analysis of data from the REasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) cohort. We categorized participants as "cancer survivors" or "no cancer history" derived from self-reported responses of being diagnosed with any cancer, excluding non-melanoma skin cancer. We defined sepsis as hospitalization for a serious infection with ≥2 systemic inflammatory response syndrome criteria. We performed Cox proportional hazard models to examine the risk of sepsis after cancer (adjusted for sociodemographics, health behaviors, and comorbidities), and stratified by race.
resultsAmong 29,693 eligible participants, 2959 (9.97%) were cancer survivors, and 26,734 (90.03%) were no cancer history participants. Among 1393 sepsis events, the risk of sepsis was higher for cancer survivors (adjusted HR: 2.61, 95% CI: 2.29-2.98) when compared to no cancer history participants. Risk of sepsis after cancer survivorship was similar for Black and White participants (p value for race and cancer interaction = 0.63).
conclusionIn this prospective cohort of community-dwelling adults we observed that cancer survivors had more than a 2.5-fold increased risk of sepsis. Public health efforts should attempt to mitigate sepsis risk by awareness and appropriate treatment (e.g., antibiotic administration) to cancer survivors with suspected infection regardless of the number of years since cancer remission.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.