ArticleJCO oncology practice2026
Acute Care Events During Systemic Cancer Treatment: Moving From Risk Prediction to Clinical Decision Support Using a Two-Model Approach.
Article in JCO oncology practice, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeAcute care events (ACEs, emergency department visits and hospitalizations) are burdensome among patients with cancer-many are preventable. Prognostic risk models have not been consistently deployed as a preventive strategy. We convened a Clinical Advisory Panel (CAP) to address this translational bottleneck and develop clinically and statistically valid prognostic models to enable risk-stratified intervention.
methodsWe identified patients age 21+ years initiating cancer treatment at an academic center or affiliated sites. We extracted sociodemographic and clinical information from the EHR. Data were divided into training (50%), validation (25%), and test (25%) sets. Models were developed using constrained elastic-net logistic regression, with clinically informed coefficient constraints.
resultsIn all, 4,697 patients were included, the mean age was 64 years, 71.9% were White, 21.8% had GI cancers, 21.7% had hematologic malignancies, 46.0% were Medicare insured, 77.6% were receiving chemotherapy, and 25.4% were receiving immunotherapy. We developed two models with our CAP, a baseline model predicting risk using a planned anticancer regimen and a follow-up model updating with drug dispensing and clinical changes. ACE in the previous month was the strongest predictor in both models (odds ratio [OR], 1.5, baseline model), with chemotherapy receipt (OR, 1.18), heart failure (OR, 1.22), abnormal international normalized ratio (OR, 1.30), and late-stage cancer (OR, 1.20) contributing. Both had acceptable statistical performance (C-statistic 0.71 and 0.70) and identified patients at the highest risk for ACE.
conclusionWe present a novel approach to ACE prediction among patients receiving cancer treatment using two models to anticipate patients' risk before treatment starts and then update based on clinical trajectory, facilitated by engagement of a CAP. To prevent ACE, risk-stratified interventions should focus on the factors we observed-optimizing comorbidities, proactively managing symptoms from high-toxicity regimens, or advanced disease.
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.