BACKGROUND: Hospitalized pediatric hematology-oncology (PHO) patients have frequent clinical deterioration events (CDE) requiring intensive care unit (ICU) admission, particularly in resource-limited settings. The objective of this study was to describe CDEs in hospitalized PHO patients in Latin America and to identify event-level and center-level risk factors for mortality. METHODS: In 2017, the authors implemented a prospective registry of CDEs, defined as unplanned transfers to a higher level of care, use of ICU-level interventions on the floor, or nonpalliative floor deaths, in 16 PHO centers in 10 countries. PHO hospital admissions and hospital inpatient days were also reported. This study analyzes the first year of registry data (June 2017 to May 2018). RESULTS: Among 16 centers, 553 CDEs were reported in PHO patients during 11,536 admissions and 119,414 inpatient days (4.63 per 1000 inpatient days). Event mortality was 29% (1.33 per 1000 inpatient days) but ranged widely across centers (11%-79% or 0.36-5.80 per 1000 inpatient days). Significant risk factors for event mortality included requiring any ICU-level intervention on the floor and not being transferred to a higher level of care. Events with organ dysfunction, a higher severity of illness, and a requirement for ICU intervention had higher mortality. In center-level analysis, hospitals with a higher volume of PHO patients, less floor use of ICU intervention, lower severity of illness on transfer, and lower rates of floor cardiopulmonary arrest had lower event mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitalized PHO patients who experience CDEs in resource-limited settings frequently require floor-based ICU interventions and have high mortality. Modifiable hospital practices around the escalation of care for these high-risk patients may contribute to poor outcomes. Earlier recognition of critical illness and timely ICU transfer may improve survival in hospitalized children with cancer.

BACKGROUND: Pediatric early warning systems (PEWS) aid in the early identification of deterioration in hospitalized children with cancer; however, they are under-used in resource-limited settings. The authors use the knowledge-to-action framework to describe the implementation strategy for Proyecto Escala de Valoracion de Alerta Temprana (EVAT), a multicenter quality-improvement collaborative, to scale-up PEWS in pediatric oncology centers in Latin America. METHODS: Proyecto EVAT mentored participating centers through an adaptable implementation strategy to: (1) monitor clinical deterioration in children with cancer, (2) contextually adapt PEWS, (3) assess barriers to using PEWS, (4) pilot and implement PEWS, (5) monitor the use of PEWS, (6) evaluate outcomes, and (7) sustain PEWS. The implementation outcomes assessed included the quality of PEWS use, the time required for implementation, and global program impact. RESULTS: From April 2017 to October 2021, 36 diverse Proyecto EVAT hospitals from 13 countries in Latin America collectively managing more than 4100 annual new pediatric cancer diagnoses successfully implemented PEWS. The time to complete all program phases varied among centers, averaging 7 months (range, 3-13 months) from PEWS pilot to implementation completion. All centers ultimately implemented PEWS and maintained high-quality PEWS use for up to 18 months after implementation. Across the 36 centers, more than 11,100 clinicians were trained in PEWS, and more than 41,000 pediatric hospital admissions had PEWS used in their care. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence-based interventions like PEWS can be successfully scaled-up regionally basis using a systematic approach that includes a collaborative network, an adaptable implementation strategy, and regional mentorship. Lessons learned can guide future programs to promote the widespread adoption of effective interventions and reduce global disparities in childhood cancer outcomes. Cancer 2022;128:4004-4016.

BackgroundEnd-stage renal disease (ESRD) is the last stage of chronic kidney disease, mainly caused by type 2 diabetes mellitus and characterized by an increased mortality risk related to cardiovascular disease. Low-dose aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid or ASA) seems to effectively prevent cardiovascular events in patients with ESRD. However, the number of interventional studies in this population remains limited and the mechanisms of aspirin-related bleeding remain poorly understood. Aspirin’s efficacy and safety may be modified by the presence of type 2 diabetes mellitus or platelet hyperreactivity.ObjectiveThe overall objective of this protocol is to (1) evaluate aspirin’s safety and efficacy in reducing the risk of thrombotic events in patients with ESRD on hemodialysis and (2) examine whether aspirin’s efficacy is modified by the presence of type 2 diabetes mellitus or platelet hyperreactivity. Specifically, the primary objective is to compare the 12-month rate of any thrombotic event (cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, arteriovenous fistula thrombosis) and Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) major bleeding in patients treated with aspirin compared to those on placebo. Secondary objectives are to test for effect modification of treatment by the presence of type 2 diabetes mellitus or platelet hyperreactivity and compare the rate of TIMI minor bleeding between treatment groups.MethodsWe developed a protocol for a phase 2 randomized, single-center, placebo-controlled, triple-blind, superiority clinical trial to assess the prophylactic efficacy and safety of aspirin in patients with ESRD and on hemodialysis. It follows the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki of the World Medical Association. A total of 342 participants would be enrolled over 12 months at a large dialysis center. Patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio and stratified by presence of type 2 diabetes mellitus and platelet hyperreactivity to receive either oral aspirin (100 mg/d) or placebo for a treatment period of 12 months. An intention-to-treat statistical analysis will be performed.ResultsThe randomized clinical trial will be performed after approval by the ethical committee of the participating center and registration at ClinicalTrials.gov.ConclusionsWe provide a protocol for a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of treatment with aspirin to reduce the risk of thrombotic events. In addition, such a study would further our understanding of the mechanism of aspirin-related bleeding and help identify subgroups of best-responders and patients with a higher risk of adverse events.Registered Report IdentifierRR1-10.2196/10516

Results: we developed a protocol for a phase II randomized, single-center, placebocontrolled, triple-blind, superiority clinical trial in order to assess aspirin prophylactic efficacy and safety in ESRD patients on hemodialysis. It follows the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki of the World Medical Association. Participants will be randomized (1:1 ratio) in 2 arms and orally receive acetylsalicylic acid 100mg/day or placebo, for 12 months. An intent-to-treat (ITT) statistical analysis will be performed.The primary composite outcome (12-month incidence of thrombotic events [cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, arteriovenous fistula thrombosis] and TIMI major bleeding) will be analyzed with Kaplan Meier curves and a log-rank test to compare treatment arms. Cox proportional hazards regression will be used to adjust for covariates, if appropriate. As secondary outcomes, the same components of the primary outcome will be assessed in a subgroup analysis after patients' stratification for the presence versus absence of type-2 Diabetes Mellitus and platelet hyper-reactivity. The presence of TIMI minor bleeding will be compared between groups and tested with a Chi-square test. Conclusions:We provide a protocol for a randomized controlled trial to evaluate aspirin's prophylactic efficacy for thrombotic events and safety in ESRD patients.When conducted, such a study would further our understanding of the mechanism of aspirin-related bleeding, and would help identify best-responders and patients with a higher risk of adverse events.