20 research outputs found

    Medical Outcomes, Quality of Life, and Family Perceptions for Outpatient vs Inpatient Neutropenia Management After Chemotherapy for Pediatric Acute Myeloid Leukemia

    Get PDF
    Importance: Pediatric acute myeloid leukemia (AML) requires multiple courses of intensive chemotherapy that result in neutropenia, with significant risk for infectious complications. Supportive care guidelines recommend hospitalization until neutrophil recovery. However, there are little data to support inpatient over outpatient management. Objective: To evaluate outpatient vs inpatient neutropenia management for pediatric AML. Design, setting, and participants: This cohort study used qualitative and quantitative methods to compare medical outcomes, patient health-related quality of life (HRQOL), and patient and family perceptions between outpatient and inpatient neutropenia management. The study included patients from 17 US pediatric hospitals with frontline chemotherapy start dates ranging from January 2011 to July 2019, although the specific date ranges differed for the individual analyses by design and relative timing. Data were analyzed from August 2019 to February 2020. Exposures: Discharge to outpatient vs inpatient neutropenia management. Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcomes of interest were course-specific bacteremia incidence, times to next course, and patient HRQOL. Course-specific mortality was a secondary medical outcome. Results: Primary quantitative analyses included 554 patients (272 [49.1%] girls and 282 [50.9%] boys; mean [SD] age, 8.2 [6.1] years). Bacteremia incidence was not significantly different during outpatient vs inpatient management (67 courses [23.8%] vs 265 courses [29.0%]; adjusted rate ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.56 to 1.06; P = .08). Outpatient management was not associated with delays to the next course compared with inpatient management (mean [SD] 30.7 [12.2] days vs 32.8 [9.7] days; adjusted mean difference, -2.2; 95% CI, -4.1 to -0.2, P = .03). Mortality during intensification II was higher for patients who received outpatient management compared with those who received inpatient management (3 patients [5.4%] vs 1 patient [0.5%]; P = .03), but comparable with inpatient management at other courses (eg, 0 patients vs 5 patients [1.3%] during induction I; P = .59). Among 97 patients evaluated for HRQOL, outcomes did not differ between outpatient and inpatient management (mean [SD] Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory total score, 70.1 [18.9] vs 68.7 [19.4]; adjusted mean difference, -2.8; 95% CI, -11.2 to 5.6). A total of 86 respondents (20 [23.3%] in outpatient management, 66 [76.7%] in inpatient management) completed qualitative interviews. Independent of management strategy received, 74 respondents (86.0%) expressed satisfaction with their experience. Concerns for hospital-associated infections among caregivers (6 of 7 caregiver respondents [85.7%] who were dissatisfied with inpatient management) and family separation (2 of 2 patient respondents [100%] who were dissatisfied with inpatient management) drove dissatisfaction with inpatient management. Stress of caring for a neutropenic child at home (3 of 3 respondents [100%] who were dissatisfied with outpatient management) drove dissatisfaction with outpatient management. Conclusions and relevance: This cohort study found that outpatient neutropenia management was not associated with higher bacteremia incidence, treatment delays, or worse HRQOL compared with inpatient neutropenia management among pediatric patients with AML. While outpatient management may be safe for many patients, course-specific mortality differences suggest that outpatient management in intensification II should be approached with caution. Patient and family experiences varied, suggesting that outpatient management may be preferred by some but may not be feasible for all families. Further studies to refine and standardize safe outpatient management practices are warranted

    A diagnostic classifier for pediatric chronic graft-versus-host disease: results of the ABLE/PBMTC 1202 study

    No full text
    The National Institutes of Health Consensus criteria for chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD) diagnosis can be challenging to apply in children, making pediatric cGVHD diagnosis difficult. We aimed to identify diagnostic pediatric cGVHD biomarkers that would complement the current clinical criteria and help differentiate cGVHD from non-cGVHD. The Applied Biomarkers of Late Effects of Childhood Cancer (ABLE) study, open at 27 transplant centers, prospectively evaluated 302 pediatric patients after hematopoietic cell transplant (234 evaluable). Forty-four patients developed cGVHD. Mixed and fixed effect regression analyses were performed on diagnostic cGVHD onset blood samples for cellular and plasma biomarkers, with individual markers declared relevant if they met 3 criteria: an effect ratio ≥1.3 or ≤0.75; an area under the curve (AUC) of ≥0.60; and a P value \u3c5.814 × 10-4 (Bonferroni correction) (mixed effect) or \u3c.05 (fixed effect). To address the complexity of cGVHD diagnosis in children, we built a machine learning-based classifier that combined multiple cellular and plasma biomarkers with clinical factors. Decreases in regulatory natural killer cells, naïve CD4 T helper cells, and naïve regulatory T cells, and elevated levels of CXCL9, CXCL10, CXCL11, ST2, ICAM-1, and soluble CD13 (sCD13) characterize the onset of cGVHD. Evaluation of the time dependence revealed that sCD13, ST2, and ICAM-1 levels varied with the timing of cGVHD onset. The cGVHD diagnostic classifier achieved an AUC of 0.89, with a positive predictive value of 82% and a negative predictive value of 80% for diagnosing cGVHD. Our polyomic approach to building a diagnostic classifier could help improve the diagnosis of cGVHD in children but requires validation in future prospective studies. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02067832
    corecore