Given a passage with a context and an answer, construct a question on the basis of the information present in the passage. Construct the question in such a way that (i) it is unambiguous, (ii) it is answerable from the passage, (iii) its answer is unique (iv) it answer uses text phrases from the passage. Avoid creating questions that (i) can't be answered correctly without actually understanding the passage and (ii) uses the same words or phrases given in the passage.

Ex Input:
Context: Sepsis is an emergency condition with high mortality and morbidity rate. There are limited data on the association of cancer as a risk factor for mortality in sepsis patients in the emergency department (ED).', 'This retrospective study was conducted at the ED, Faculty of Medicine, Ramathibodi Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand. The study period was between January 1st and December 31st, 2014. The inclusion criteria were as follows: adult patients over 15 years of age who presented at the ED with suspicion of sepsis, received treatment at the ED, and whose blood culture was found to be positive. Clinical data were recorded from medical records including the Mortality in Emergency Department Sepsis score (MEDS score). The primary outcome of this study was mortality at one month. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify independent factors associated with death.', 'During the study period, there were 775 eligible patients. The two most common pathogens identified from blood cultures were Staphylococcus aureus (193 patients; 24.9%) and Escherichia coli (158 patients; 20.4%). At one month after presenting at the ED, 110 patients (14.2%) had died. There were four significant factors for death, having cancer, being on an endotracheal tube, initial diagnosis of bacteremia, and high MED scores. Having cancer had an adjusted OR of 2.12 (95% CI of 1.29, 3.47).
Answer: Cancer patients have double the risk of mortality if presenting with sepsis at the ED.

Ex Output:
Do cancer Patients Are at High Risk of Mortality if Presenting with Sepsis at an Emergency Department?

Ex Input:
Context: Long-QT syndrome (LQTS), a cardiac arrhythmia disorder with variable phenotype, often results in devastating outcomes, including sudden cardiac death. Variable expression, independently from the primary disease-causing mutation, can partly be explained by genetic modifiers. This study investigates variants in a known LQTS-causative gene, AKAP9, for potential LQTS-type 1-modifying effects.', "Members of a South African LQTS-type 1 founder population (181 noncarriers and 168 mutation carriers) carrying the identical-by-descent KCNQ1 p.Ala341Val (A341V) mutation were evaluated for modifying effects of AKAP9 variants on heart rate-corrected QT interval (QTc), cardiac events, and disease severity. Tag single nucleotide polymorphisms in AKAP9 rs11772585, rs7808587, rs2282972, and rs2961024 (order, 5'-3'positive strand) were genotyped. Associations between phenotypic traits and alleles, genotypes, and haplotypes were statistically assessed, adjusting for the degree of relatedness and confounding variables. The rs2961024 GG genotype, always represented by CGCG haplotype homozygotes, revealed an age-dependent heart rate-corrected QT interval increase (1% per additional 10 years) irrespective of A341V mutation status (P=0.006). The rs11772585 T allele, found uniquely in the TACT haplotype, more than doubled (218%) the risk of cardiac events (P=0.002) in the presence of A341V; additionally, it increased disease severity (P=0.025). The rs7808587 GG genotype was associated with a 74% increase in cardiac event risk (P=0.046), whereas the rs2282972 T allele, predominantly represented by the CATT haplotype, decreased risk by 53% (P=0.001).
Answer: AKAP9 has been identified as an LQTS-type 1-modifying gene. Variants investigated altered heart rate-corrected QT interval irrespective of mutation status, as well as cardiac event risk, and disease severity, in mutation carriers.

Ex Output:
Is aKAP9 a genetic modifier of congenital long-QT syndrome type 1?

Ex Input:
Context: Because severe acidosis is an indicator of poor prognosis in trauma patients, medical records of these patients were analyzed to determine whether aggressive resuscitation was appropriate.', 'Data from a level 1 trauma center registry were reviewed retrospectively to identify patients with a pH < or = 7.0. Thirty-seven patients were identified. Severely acidotic patients were compared to average trauma patients in terms of demographics, resuscitation, injury, and outcome. Surviving acidotic patients were also compared to nonsurviving acidotic patients.', 'Half of the severely acidotic group survived initial resuscitation with approximately one third surviving to leave the hospital. There were no chronically disabled survivors. Nonsurviving acidotic patients were more unstable, more neurologically depressed, and more severely injured. Resuscitation efforts did not consume excessive hospital resources.
Answer: Severe acidosis alone is not a sufficiently powerful predictor of outcome to justify withholding resuscitation; however, when combined with coma and shock, this condition had no survivors in this small series.

Ex Output:
Does severe acidosis alone predict mortality in the trauma patient?