Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Background: Guidelines recommend the Pulmonary Embolism (PE) Severity Index (PESI) or the simplified PESI (sPESI) to identify low-risk patients eligible for outpatient care. Cancer is a high-scoring variable in both scores, but definitions vary: "any" cancer (active/recent as well as remote/nonactive) vs "active" cancer (only active or recent). Objectives: This study evaluated the effect of narrowing the cancer definition (from any to active) on outpatient eligibility. Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of a retrospective cohort study across 21 US community hospitals. Included were ambulatory adults diagnosed with PE in primary care who underwent vital sign measurements. Active-cancer PESI accrued cancer points only for metastatic disease or diagnosis, treatment, or palliative care within 12 months. We compared proportions of low-risk classification and 30-day adverse events (recurrent venous thromboembolism, major bleeding, and all-cause mortality) between any- and active-cancer definitions in both PESI and sPESI. Thirty-day outcomes among low-risk patients were rare (0.5%) and similar between groups. Conclusion: An active-only cancer definition (vs any cancer) in PESI and sPESI classified a larger proportion of PE patients as low risk. No differences in 30-day outcomes were observed in this very low-risk cohort. Studies in higher-risk cohorts are needed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Campbell et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: