ReviewClinical and experimental medicine2025
Search for novel biomarkers of febrile neutropenia in hematological patients: an overview.
Review in Clinical and experimental medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A single-center prospective study was conducted at a tertiary care hospital in Kuopio Finland over the past two decades, searching for novel biomarker candidates to predict complicated course of febrile neutropenia (FN) in hematological patients. In Dec 2006‒Dec 2015, 85 patients with acute myeloid leukemia and 179 autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients were included. More than 20 biomarkers were evaluated in subsequent patient cohorts and compared to C-reactive protein (CRP) and procalcitonin (PCT). The samples were taken on d0-d2 from the beginning of FN. Here, we provide an overview of the results of these studies. Most biomarkers evaluated did not provide additional prognostic benefit compared to CRP or PCT. The most promising biomarkers warranting further studies include soluble cluster of differentiation 14, interleukin-1-receptor antagonist, interleukin-10, tissue inhibitor of matrix metalloproteinase-1, and caspase-cleaved cytokeratin-18. Several biomarkers evaluated in this series of studies are hampered by impaired production by neutrophils/leukocytes (matrix metalloproteinase-8, cell-free plasma DNA and soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor) or platelets (vascular endothelial growth factor). For now, these novel biomarkers cannot substitute the conventional markers nor provide additional benefit in routine use. Optimally, the most promising novel markers should be evaluated in prospective multicenter studies with higher patient numbers and several endpoints to more reliably evaluate their performance. At present, close patient monitoring is imperative in hematological patients with FN. The additional information provided by novel FN biomarkers may be useful, but they should be evaluated combined with daily evaluation of sepsis scoring systems.
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.