BackgroundOutcome prediction scoring systems are increasingly used in intensive care medicine, but most were not developed for use in cardiac surgery patients. We compared the performance of four intensive care outcome prediction scoring systems (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II [APACHE II], Simplified Acute Physiology Score II [SAPS II], Sequential Organ Failure Assessment [SOFA], and Cardiac Surgery Score [CASUS]) in patients after open heart surgery.MethodsWe prospectively included all consecutive adult patients who underwent open heart surgery and were admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) between January 1st 2007 and December 31st 2008. Scores were calculated daily from ICU admission until discharge. The outcome measure was ICU mortality. The performance of the four scores was assessed by calibration and discrimination statistics. Derived variables (Mean- and Max- scores) were also evaluated.ResultsDuring the study period, 2801 patients (29.6% female) were included. Mean age was 66.9 ± 10.7 years and the ICU mortality rate was 5.2%. Calibration tests for SOFA and CASUS were reliable throughout (p-value not < 0.05), but there were significant differences between predicted and observed outcome for SAPS II (days 1, 2, 3 and 5) and APACHE II (days 2 and 3). CASUS, and its mean- and maximum-derivatives, discriminated better between survivors and non-survivors than the other scores throughout the study (area under curve ≥ 0.90). In order of best discrimination, CASUS was followed by SOFA, then SAPS II, and finally APACHE II. SAPS II and APACHE II derivatives had discrimination results that were superior to those of the SOFA derivatives.ConclusionsCASUS and SOFA are reliable ICU mortality risk stratification models for cardiac surgery patients. SAPS II and APACHE II did not perform well in terms of calibration and discrimination statistics.
Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a difficult to treat subtype of lung cancer. One of the hallmarks of SCLC is its almost uniform chemotherapy sensitivity. However, chemotherapy response is typically transient and patients frequently succumb to SCLC within a year following diagnosis. We performed a transcriptome analysis of the major human lung cancer entities. We show a significant overexpression of genes involved in the DNA damage response, specifically in SCLC. Particularly CHEK1, which encodes for the cell cycle checkpoint kinase CHK1, is significantly overexpressed in SCLC, compared to lung adenocarcinoma. In line with uncontrolled cell cycle progression in SCLC, we find that CDC25A, B and C mRNAs are expressed at significantly higher levels in SCLC, compared to lung adenocarcinoma. We next profiled the efficacy of compounds targeting CHK1 and ATR. Both, ATR- and CHK1 inhibitors induce genotoxic damage and apoptosis in human and murine SCLC cell lines, but not in lung adenocarcinoma cells. We further demonstrate that murine SCLC tumors were highly sensitive to ATR- and CHK1 inhibitors, while Kras G12D-driven murine lung adenocarcinomas were resistant against these compounds and displayed continued growth under therapy. Altogether, our data indicate that SCLC displays an actionable dependence on ATR/CHK1-mediated cell cycle checkpoints.
Most of general ICU scoring systems use extensive data collection and focus on the first day of ICU stay. Despite this fact, general scores do not perform well in the prediction of outcome in cardiac surgical patients. Our new 10-variable risk index performs very well, with calibration and discrimination very high, better than general severity systems, and it is an appropriate tool for daily risk stratification in ICU cardiac surgery patients. Thus, it may serve as an expert system for diagnosing organ failure and predicting mortality in ICU cardiac surgical patients.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.