Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31596490›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2019

Development and Validation of a Score to Predict Acute Care Use After Initiation of Systemic Therapy for Cancer.

Robert C Grant, Rahim Moineddin, Zhan Yao, Melanie Powis, Vishal Kukreti, Monika K Krzyzanowska

Open access · goldAbstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Potentially preventable unplanned hospitalizations due to adverse events in patients receiving systemic anticancer therapy: a retrospective single-center study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Predicting the Future by Studying the Past for Patients With Cancer Diagnosed in the Emergency Department.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Natural Language Processing Methods to Identify Oncology Patients at High Risk for Acute Care with Clinical Notes.AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science proceedings. AMIA Joint Summits on Translational Science · 2023
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Robert C GrantDivision of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Rahim MoineddinICES, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Zhan YaoICES, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Melanie PowisDivision of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Vishal KukretiDivision of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Monika K KrzyzanowskaDivision of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
University Health Network · CAInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences · CAUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Emergency department visits and hospitalizations after starting systemic therapy for cancer are frequent, undesirable, and costly. A score to quantify the risk of needing acute care can inform decision-making and facilitate the development of preventive interventions. Objective: To develop and validate a score to predict early use of acute care after initiating systemic therapy for cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective population-based cohort study was conducted between July 1, 2014, and June 30, 2015. Patients with cancer were eligible if they started a new systemic therapy for cancer, regardless of line of therapy. A total of 12 162 patients in Southwestern Ontario, Canada, formed the development cohort and 15 845 patients in Northeastern Ontario formed the validation cohort. Data analysis was conducted from December 1, 2016, to August 10, 2019. Exposures: The Prediction of Acute Care Use During Cancer Treatment (PROACCT) score was created based on logistic regression in the development cohort. Combinations of cancer type and regimens were grouped into quintiles based on risk of needing acute care. The score was assessed in the validation cohort. Main Outcomes and Measures: At least 1 emergency department visit or hospitalization within 30 days after starting systemic therapy for cancer identified from administrative databases. Results: Among the 12 162 patients in the development cohort, 6903 were women and 5259 were men (mean [SD] age, 62.9 [12.6] years); among the 15 845 patients in the validation cohort, 9025 were women and 6820 were men (mean [SD] age, 62.9 [12.6] years). Use of acute care occurred within 30 days after initiation of systemic therapy in 3039 patients (25.0%) in the development cohort and 4212 patients (26.6%) in the validation cohort. Three characteristics predicted early use of acute care and formed the PROACCT score: combination of cancer type and treatment regimen, age, and emergency department visits in the prior year (C statistic, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.66-0.69; P < .001). Other characteristics including patient-reported symptoms did not improve performance. In the validation cohort, the PROACCT score was associated with use of acute care (odds ratio per point increase, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.20-1.24; P < .001), had a C statistic of 0.61 (95% CI, 0.60-0.62; P < .001), was reasonably calibrated, and provided net benefit in decision curve analysis. Conclusions and Relevance: The PROACCT score predicted the risk of early use of acute care in patients starting systemic treatment for cancer and could be incorporated at the point of care to select patients for preventive interventions. Future studies should validate the PROACCT score in other settings.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAntineoplastic AgentsDatabases, FactualEmergency Service, HospitalFemaleHospitalizationHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsOntarioRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentAntineoplastic Agents

Identifiers

PMID31596490
PMCPMC6802230
OpenAlexW2979447833

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.