Use of antibiotics and outcomes of patients presenting to emergency department with non-neutropenic fever and/or suspected infection.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
e18693 Background: Current guidelines are clear about antibiotic choices for cancer patients presenting to emergency department (ED) with febrile neutropenia. However, there is little known about antibiotic use and outcomes of cancer patients who present to ED with non-neutropenic fever. The objective of this study was to identify antibiotic prescribing pattern of patients with solid tumor malignancies who presented to Juravinski Hospital (JH) emergency department (ED) with non-neutropenic fever or/and suspected infection. Methods: A retrospective cohort review was completed. All patients with solid tumor malignancies followed by an oncologist at Juravinski Cancer Centre (JCC) who presented to JH ED with non-neutropenic fever or suspected infection from July 1 to December 31, 2020 were identified from an electronic database. Patients’ baseline characteristics, antibiotics used, and outcome information were collected. The primary outcome was proportion of patients who received broad spectrum antibiotic(s) (either Piperacillin and Tazobactam, a Carbapenem, or/and Cefepime) during ED visit or hospital admission. Results: A total of 581 patients were identified and 275 met inclusion criteria. Median age was 71 years, with 46% male. Most common cancer types were breast (21%), lung (18%), gastrointestinal (16%), and genitourinary (13%). Most patients had advanced cancer [stage 4 (59%), stage 3 (14%)], and 37% were on active systemic treatment at the time of ED presentation. A source of infection was identified in 68% of patients, which included 83/187 (44%) respiratory, 32/187 (17%) cutaneous or soft tissue, 24/187 (13%) genitourinary, 20/187 (11%) gastrointestinal, 14/187 (5%) hepatobiliary, and 12/187 iatrogenic (4%). Majority of ED visits (73%) resulted in hospital admission. Median duration of hospital stay was 6 days, and death occurred in 12% of the admitted patients. Broad-spectrum intravenous antibiotics were used in 47% of patients, and most of the time (78%) was the first antibiotic type given after arrival in ED. Conclusions: In our single-centre study, nearly half of patients with solid tumor malignancies who presented to ED with non-neutropenic fever or/and suspected infection received broad spectrum intravenous antibiotics typically recommended in febrile neutropenia protocols. These data suggest a need for quality improvement strategies to improve antibiotic stewardship for patients with solid tumour malignancies presenting to ED with non-neutropenic fever.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".