ArticleBMJ open2021
Sepsis in patients with haematological versus solid cancer: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Understanding oncologic emergencies and related emergency department visits and hospitalizations: a systematic review.BMC emergency medicine · 2025Pooled it
- The relationship between urinary tract infections and sepsis: results from Mendelian randomization and MIMIC data study.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Risk Factors for Adverse Outcomes in Cancer Patients With Sepsis.Journal of clinical medicine research · 2026Article
- Clinical characteristics and prognostic factors of sepsis in patients with malignancy.Scientific reports · 2025Observational
- Sepsis with Cancer is Marked by a Dysregulated Myeloid Cell Compartment: A Pilot Study.Journal of inflammation research · 2025Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of Plasma Microbial Cell-Free DNA Sequencing When Added to Usual Care Diagnostic Testing for Immunocompromised Host Pneumonia.PharmacoEconomics · 2024Article
- A Case of Revelation Due to Pegfilgrastim.Cureus · 2024Article
- Investigation of antimicrobial susceptibility patterns, risk factors and their impact on mortality in cancer patients at a tertiary care cancer hospital- A prospective study.Annals of clinical microbiology and antimicrobials · 2024Article
- A Systematic Literature Review to Identify Diagnostic Gaps in Managing Immunocompromised Patients With Cancer and Suspected Infection.Open forum infectious diseases · 2024Review
- A clinically applicable prediction model for the risk of in-hospital mortality in solid cancer patients admitted to intensive care units with sepsis.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023Article
- Association between site of infection and mortality in patients with cancer with sepsis or septic shock: A retrospective cohort study.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2023Article
- Impact of Infection Patterns on the Outcomes of Patients with Hematological Malignancies in Southwest China: A 10-Year Retrospective Case-Control Study.Infection and drug resistance · 2023Article
- Expert consensus on the monitoring and treatment of sepsis-induced immunosuppression.Military Medical Research · 2022Article
- Article
- Impact of cancer on mortality rates in patients with sepsis: A meta-analysis and meta-regression of current studies.World journal of clinical cases · 2022Article
- 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
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aims to examine the outcome of haematological and patients with solid cancer presenting with sepsis to the emergency department (ED).
designSingle-centred, retrospective cohort study. Setting conducted at an academic emergency department of a tertiary hospital.
participantsAll patients >18 years of age admitted with sepsis were included.
interventionsPatients were stratified into two groups: haematological and solid malignancy. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME: The primary outcome of the study was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included intensive care unit (ICU) mortality, ICU and hospital lengths of stay and mechanical ventilation duration.
results442 sepsis cancer patients were included in the study, of which 305 patients (69%) had solid tumours and 137 patients (31%) had a haematological malignancy. The mean age at presentation was 67.92 (±13.32) and 55.37 (±20.85) (p<0.001) for solid and liquid tumours, respectively. Among patients with solid malignancies, lung cancer was the most common source (15.6%). As for the laboratory workup, septic solid cancer patients were found to have a higher white blood count (12 576.90 vs 9137.23; p=0.026). During their hospital stay, a total of 158 (51.8%) patients with a solid malignancy died compared with 57 (41.6%) patients with a haematological malignancy (p=0.047). There was no statistically significant association between cancer type and hospital mortality (OR 1.15 for liquid cancer p 0.58). There was also no statistically significant difference regarding intravenous fluid administration, vasopressor use, steroid use or intubation.
conclusionSolid tumour patients with sepsis or septic shock are at the same risk of mortality as patients with haematological tumours. However, haematological malignancy patients admitted with sepsis or septic shock have higher rates of bacteraemia.
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.