Purpose The Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) score is used to risk stratify outpatients with febrile neutropenia (FN). However, it is rarely used in hospital settings. We aimed to describe management, use of MASCC score, and outcomes among hospitalized patients with FN. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with cancer and FN. We collected patient demographics, cancer characteristics, microbiological profile, MASCC score, utilization of critical care therapies, documentation of goals of care (GOC), and inpatient deaths. Outcomes associated with low-(≥ 21) versus high-risk (< 21) MASCC scores are presented as absolute differences. Results Of 193 patients, few (2%, n = 3) had MASCC scores documented, but when calculated, 52% (n = 101) had a high-risk score (< 21). GOC were discussed in 12% (n = 24) of patients. Twenty one percent (n = 40) required intermediate/ICU level of care, and 12% (n = 23) died in the hospital. Those with a low-risk score were 33% less likely to require intermediate/ICU care (95% CI 23 to 44%) and 19% less likely to die in the hospital (95% CI 10% to 27%) compared to those with high-risk score. Conclusions MASCC score was rarely used for hospitalized patients with FN, but high-risk score was associated with worse outcomes. Education efforts to incorporate MASCC score into the workflow may help identify patients at high risk for complications and help clinicians admit these patients to a higher level of care (e.g., intermediate/ICU care) or guide them to initiate earlier GOC discussions.

No abstract

No abstract

e19100 Background: Febrile neutropenia is a medical emergency often managed by internists, but adherence to guidelines has not been well-described. We aimed to describe care and outcomes of a retrospective cohort of patients hospitalized with febrile neutropenia at a single tertiary care hospital. Methods: We included adults ≥18 years old who had a cancer diagnosis and required hospital admission for a principal diagnosis of fever and neutropenia (ANC < 500) from October 2015 - April 2019. We reviewed records to identify demographics, cancer diagnosis and stage, and outcomes, including death. Results: We included 193 patients; all were cared for by hospitalists. About half (52%) were classified as high risk [ < 21 Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC)score], but only 1 patient had a documented MASCC score in hospital progress notes. The majority of patients were female (55%) and white (84%). Twenty-three percent had a stage IV diagnosis. Most (89.1%) patients were within their first chemotherapy cycle, and 23% received GCSF. Approximately half (47%) had solid tumors; the remainder had hematologic malignancies. About one quarter (27%) had positive blood cultures (of these, 43.4 % were gram positive cocci (GPC); 49.1% were gram negative rods (GNR)). Most patients received empiric coverage for GPC and GNR: 82% received cefepime and 42% received empiric MRSA coverage. Few patients had cultures positive for resistant organisms such as MRSA (n = 3) or pseudomonas (n = 4). Hematology/Oncology was consulted for most (82%) cases. Inpatient mortality occurred in 12% of patients. Compared to those who survived, patients who died had lower MASCC score 13.9 (vs. 19.1) and were more likely to receive critical care therapies during hospitalization (70% vs. 14%). Few patients (n = 24, 12%) had documented goals of care (GOC) discussions. Conclusions: Although MASCC is predictive of outcomes, internists caring for patients with fever and neutropenia do not document this score. Hospitalist-focused education efforts about MASCC score could improve care. Few patients had documented GOC discussions. Oncologists should maintain good communication with internal medicine colleagues, who may be hesitant to address GOC in patients receiving chemotherapy.