RT Journal Article SR Electronic T1 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 JF medRxiv FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press SP 2022.03.28.22272682 DO 10.1101/2022.03.28.22272682 A1 Sánchez-Cánovas, Manuel A1 Jimenez-Fonseca, Paula A1 Garay, David Fernández A1 Solís, Mónica Cejuela A1 Elía, Diego Casado A1 Salvans, Eva Coma A1 de la Haba Vacas, Irma A1 Sánchez, David Gómez A1 Montés, Ana Fernández A1 Giménez, Roberto Morales A1 de Tejada, Mercedes Biosca Gómez A1 Arrula, Virginia Arrazubi A1 López, Silvia Sequero A1 Candelera, Remedios Otero A1 Cendra, Cristina Sánchez A1 de la Peña, Marina Justo A1 Muñoz, Diana Moreno A1 Sarmiento, Mayra Orillo A1 de Castro, Eva Martínez A1 Escobar, Ignacio García A1 Vidal, Alejandro Bernal A1 Moran, Laura Ortega A1 Muñoz Martín, Andrés J. A1 Bayona, Rodrigo Sánchez A1 Martínez Ortiz, María José A1 de la Peña, Francisco Ayala A1 Vicente, Vicente A1 Carmona-Bayonas, Alberto YR 2022 UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/04/02/2022.03.28.22272682.abstract 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.