Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 19, 2025

Author Spotlight: Balancing Speed, Cost, and Accuracy in Neutrophil Function Assessment with NeutroFun Screen Protocol
Published on: February 9, 2024
Clinical prediction models for febrile neutropenia and its outcomes: a systematic review
Joshua Sheehy1,2,3, Marianne Gallanagh4, Clair Sullivan5,6
1Haematology and Bone Marrow Transplant Department, Cancer Care Services, The Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia. Joshua.sheehy@uq.net.au.
Purpose:
Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a life-threatening complication of chemotherapy. Although practice guidelines suggest the use of existing prediction models when making decisions to prevent and treat FN, recent evidence suggests that these models are limited in their discriminative ability. This study aims to systematically review and critically evaluate the recent literature to assess the question: what evidence-based clinical prediction models can be used to predict FN or its outcomes?
Methods:
PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and SCOPUS were searched for primary journal articles that developed or validated models that predicted FN or outcomes in patients with FN. Risk of bias was critically evaluated using the Prediction model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST).
Results:
Five thousand nine hundred nineteen articles were identified, of which 90 met inclusion criteria. Twenty-five studies predicted FN, and 65 studies predicted outcomes in patients with FN, including 28 that predicted mortality, 35 that predicted microbiological outcomes, and 35 that predicted other complications. Eight studies used machine learning methods in their development, and few studies were externally validated. All 90 studies were graded as high risk of bias using PROBAST.
Conclusion:
Prediction models for FN and its outcomes demonstrate promising discriminatory ability; however, several limitations have prevented these from translating clinically. These limitations include variable FN definitions, high ROB in current models, limited external validation, and heterogeneous cohorts. Future work is needed to further develop and validate robust, well-evidenced models that can translate into clinical practice. This may best be achieved through machine learning and electronic medical record integration.
More Related Videos
03:05Author Spotlight: Advancing Early Detection and Treatment of Gastrointestinal Tumors
Published on: February 16, 2024
07:13Comparison of Predictive Performance of Three Lymph Node Staging Systems in Colorectal Signet Ring Cell Carcinoma Based on Machine Learning Model
Published on: April 18, 2025
Related Concept Videos
Cancer Survival Analysis
Acute Pyelonephritis II: Diagnostic Studies and Management
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...