ArticleJAMA network open2019
Development and Validation of a Score to Predict Acute Care Use After Initiation of Systemic Therapy for Cancer.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic Review of Interventions to Optimize Emergency Department Care of Patients with Cancer.The western journal of emergency medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Drivers of Emergency Department Use Among Oncology Patients in the Era of Novel Cancer Therapeutics: A Systematic Review.The oncologist · 2023Pooled it
- Healthcare provider evaluation of machine learning-directed care: reactions to deployment on a randomised controlled study.BMJ health & care informatics · 2023Trial
- Remote, proactive, telephone based management of toxicity in outpatients during adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early stage breast cancer: pragmatic, cluster randomised trial.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2021Trial
- 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 · 2026Article
- First-Line Enfortumab Vedotin Plus Pembrolizumab vs Gemcitabine Plus Cisplatin for Metastatic Urothelial Carcinoma.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Acute Care Events During Systemic Cancer Treatment: Moving From Risk Prediction to Clinical Decision Support Using a Two-Model Approach.JCO oncology practice · 2026Article
- Patient-reported symptom and urgent healthcare use in neuroendocrine tumors.Endocrine oncology (Bristol, England) · 2026Article
- Acute Care Utilization Patterns During Chemotherapy and Predictive Model Development at a Rural Community Cancer Center.JCO clinical cancer informatics · 2025Article
- National Trends in the Prevalence of Self-Perceived Overweight Among Adolescents Between 2005 and 2022: Nationwide Representative Study.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2024Article
- 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 · 2024Article
- Development of a claims-based risk-scoring model to predict emergency department visits in older patients receiving anti-neoplastic therapy.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Nomogram for Predicting Early Mortality after Umbilical Cord Blood Transplantation in Children with Inborn Errors of Immunity.Journal of clinical immunology · 2023Article
- Predicting Acute Care Events Among Patients Initiating Chemotherapy: A Practice-Based Validation and Adaptation of the PROACCT Model.JCO oncology practice · 2023Article
- Comparison of Oncologist and Model Estimates of Risk for Hospitalization During Systemic Therapy for Advanced Cancer.JCO oncology practice · 2023Article
- Development and validation of a risk score (Delay-7) to predict the occurrence of a treatment delay following cycle 1 chemotherapy.ESMO open · 2023Article
- 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 · 2023Article
- Association Between Remote Monitoring and Acute Care Visits in High-Risk Patients Initiating Intravenous Antineoplastic Therapy.JCO oncology practice · 2022Article
- Predictive Modeling for Adverse Events and Risk Stratification Programs for People Receiving Cancer Treatment.JCO oncology practice · 2022Review
- Applying Hospital Readmissions to Oncology: A Square Peg in a Round Hole?JCO oncology practice · 2022Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.