Search

Objectives: Historically, patients with a hematologic malignancy have one of the highest mortality rates among cancer patients admitted to the ICU. Therefore, physicians are often reluctant to admit these patients to the ICU. The aim of our study was to examine the survival of patients who have a hematologic malignancy and multiple organ failure admitted to the ICU. Design: This retrospective cohort study, part of the HEMA-ICU study group, was designed to study the survival of patients with a hematologic malignancy and organ failure after admission to the ICU. Patients were followed for at least 1 year. Setting: Five university hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients: One-thousand ninety-seven patients with a hematologic malignancy who were admitted at the ICU. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: Primary outcome was 1-year survival. Organ failure was categorized as acute kidney injury, respiratory failure, hepatic failure, and hemodynamic failure; multiple organ failure was defined as failure of two or more organs. The World Health Organization performance score measured 3 months after discharge from the ICU was used as a measure of functional outcome. The 1-year survival rate among these patients was 38%. Multiple organ failure was inversely associated with long-term survival, and an absence of respiratory failure was the strongest predictor of 1-year survival. The survival rate among patients with 2, 3, and 4 failing organs was 27%, 22%, and 8%, respectively. Among all surviving patients for which World Health Organization scores were available, 39% had a World Health Organization performance score of 0–1 3 months after ICU discharge. Functional outcome was not associated with the number of failing organs. Conclusions: Our results suggest that multiple organ failure should not be used as a criterion for excluding a patient with a hematologic malignancy from admission to the ICU.

Objectives: Historically, patients with a hematologic malignancy have one of the highest mortality rates among cancer patients admitted to the ICU. Therefore, physicians are often reluctant to admit these patients to the ICU. The aim of our study was to examine the survival of patients who have a hematologic malignancy and multiple organ failure admitted to the ICU. Design: This retrospective cohort study, part of the HEMA-ICU study group, was designed to study the survival of patients with a hematologic malignancy and organ failure after admission to the ICU. Patients were followed for at least 1 year. Setting: Five university hospitals in the Netherlands. Patients: One-thousand ninety-seven patients with a hematologic malignancy who were admitted at the ICU. Interventions: None. Measurements and Main Results: Primary outcome was 1-year survival. Organ failure was categorized as acute kidney injury, respiratory failure, hepatic failure, and hemodynamic failure; multiple organ failure was defined as failure of two or more organs. The World Health Organization performance score measured 3 months after discharge from the ICU was used as a measure of functional outcome. The 1-year survival rate among these patients was 38%. Multiple organ failure was inversely associated with long-term survival, and an absence of respiratory failure was the strongest predictor of 1-year survival. The survival rate among patients with 2, 3, and 4 failing organs was 27%, 22%, and 8%, respectively. Among all surviving patients for which World Health Organization scores were available, 39% had a World Health Organization performance score of 0–1 3 months after ICU discharge. Functional outcome was not associated with the number of failing organs. Conclusions: Our results suggest that multiple organ failure should not be used as a criterion for excluding a patient with a hematologic malignancy from admission to the ICU.

Background: Oral follow-up therapy is problematic in moulds with reduced azole-susceptibility, such as azole-resistant Aspergillus fumigatus infection. Currently, only intravenous liposomal amphotericin B (L-AmB) is advocated by guidelines for the treatment of azole-resistant aspergillosis infections. Preclinical research indicates that high-dose posaconazole (HD-POS) might be a feasible option provided that high drug exposure (ie POS serum through levels >3 mg/L) can be achieved and is safe. Objectives: To describe our experience with the use of oral HD-POS as treatment strategies for patients infected with pathogens with a POS MIC close to the clinical breakpoint. Patients/Methods: We review evidence supporting the use of HD-POS and describe our experience on safety and efficacy in 16 patients. In addition, we describe the adverse events (AE) observed in 25 patients with POS concentrations at the higher end of the population distribution during treatment with the licensed dose. Results: Sixteen patients were treated intentionally with HD-POS for voriconazole-resistant invasive aspergillosis (7/16), mucormycosis (4/16), salvage therapy for IA (4/16) and IA at a sanctuary site (spondylodiscitis) in 1. Grade 3-4 AEs were observed in 6, and all of them were considered at least possibly related. Grade 3-4 AEs were observed in 5 of the 25 patients with spontaneous high POS serum through levels considered at least possibly related using Naranjo scale. Conclusions: High-dose posaconazole is a treatment option if strict monitoring for both exposure and for AE is possible.

Gastrointestinal mucositis is a complex inflammatory reaction of the mucous membranes, a side effect of both chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Currently, assessment scales are used to diagnose mucositis. However, a biomarker which would determine whether there is mucositis and thereby establish the severity objectively would be very useful. This will give the opportunity to evaluate studies, to determine risk factors and incidence, and it will make it possible to compare studies. Moreover, this biomarker might improve clinical management for patients. In this paper, we reviewed studies concerning potential biomarkers in blood samples and fecal samples, and potential tests in breath samples and urine samples. We include biomarkers and tests studied in animal models and/or in clinical trials, and discuss the validity, diagnostic accuracy, and applicability.