PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Sánchez-Cánovas, Manuel
AU  - Jimenez-Fonseca, Paula
AU  - Garay, David Fernández
AU  - Solís, Mónica Cejuela
AU  - Elía, Diego Casado
AU  - Salvans, Eva Coma
AU  - de la Haba Vacas, Irma
AU  - Sánchez, David Gómez
AU  - Montés, Ana Fernández
AU  - Giménez, Roberto Morales
AU  - de Tejada, Mercedes Biosca Gómez
AU  - Arrula, Virginia Arrazubi
AU  - López, Silvia Sequero
AU  - Candelera, Remedios Otero
AU  - Cendra, Cristina Sánchez
AU  - de la Peña, Marina Justo
AU  - Muñoz, Diana Moreno
AU  - Sarmiento, Mayra Orillo
AU  - de Castro, Eva Martínez
AU  - Escobar, Ignacio García
AU  - Vidal, Alejandro Bernal
AU  - Moran, Laura Ortega
AU  - Muñoz Martín, Andrés J.
AU  - Bayona, Rodrigo Sánchez
AU  - Martínez Ortiz, María José
AU  - de la Peña, Francisco Ayala
AU  - Vicente, Vicente
AU  - Carmona-Bayonas, Alberto
TI  - Prediction of serious complications in patients with cancer and pulmonary thromboembolism: validation of the EPIPHANY Index in a prospective cohort of patients from the PERSEO Study
AID  - 10.1101/2022.03.28.22272682
DP  - 2022 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2022.03.28.22272682
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/04/02/2022.03.28.22272682.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/04/02/2022.03.28.22272682.full
AB  - Introduction There is currently no validated score capable of classifying cancer-associated pulmonary embolism (PE) in its full spectrum of severity. This study has validated the EPIHANY Index, a new tool to predict serious complications in cancer patients with suspected or unsuspected PE.Method The PERSEO Study prospectively recruited individuals with PE and cancer from 22 Spanish hospitals. The estimation of the relative frequency θ of complications based on the EPIPHANY Index categories was made using the Bayesian alternative for the binomial test.Results Nine hundred patients diagnosed with PE between 2017/2020 were recruited. The rate of serious complications at 15 days was 11.8%, 95% highest density interval [HDI], 9.8-14.1%. Of the EPIPHANY low-risk patients, 2.4% (95% HDI, 0.8-4.6%) had serious complications, as did 5.5% (95% HDI, 2.9-8.7%) of the moderate-risk participants and 21.0% (95% HDI, 17.0-24.0%) of those with high-risk episodes. The EPIPHANY Index correlated with overall survival. Both the EPIPHANY Index and the Hestia criteria exhibited greater negative predictive value and a lower negative likelihood ratio than the remaining models. The incidence of bleeding at 6 months was 6.2% (95% HDI, 2.9-9.5%) in low/moderate-risk vs 12.7% (95% HDI, 10.1-15.4%) in high-risk (p-value=0.037) episodes. Of the outpatients, complications at 15 days were recorded in 2.1% (95% HDI, 0.7-4.0%) of the cases with EPIPHANY low/intermediate-risk vs 5.3% (95% HDI, 1.7-11.8%) in high-risk cases.Conclusion We have validated the EPIPHANY Index in patients with incidental or symptomatic cancer-related PE. This model can contribute to standardize decision-making in a scenario lacking quality evidence.Summary We have validated the EPIPHANY Index in patients with acute, incidental, or symptomatic cancer-related PE. This predictive model of complications can contribute to standardize decision-making in a scenario lacking quality evidence.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThe funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscriptAuthor DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Hospital General Universitario Jose Maria Morales Meseguer (code: C.P. PERSEO - C.I. EST: 57/17, 26 October 2017) and by the Spanish Agency of Medicines and Medical Devices (AEMPS) (6 October 2017)I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.