Ceftazidime as monotherapy or combined with teicoplanin for initial empiric treatment of presumed bacteremia in febrile granulocytopenic patients.

In a prospective randomized study, 120 febrile, granulocytopenic patients received as initial therapy ceftazidime with or without teicoplanin. At the onset of fever, patients had no obvious infectious focus. For 103 assessable episodes, initial bacteremias were detected in 18 of 51 patients (35%) given ceftazidime and 20 of 52 patients (38%) given the combination; 13 and 17 bacteremias caused by gram-positive bacteria occurred in these groups, respectively. There was no difference in terms of the final response (25 of 51 patients [49%] treated with ceftazidime alone versus 33 of 52 patients [63%] given the combination), and the morbidity was comparable for both treatment groups. The duration of fever and of total antibiotic therapy were similar in both groups. Initial therapy was modified in 26 patients (51%) treated with ceftazidime, with 20 surviving the infection, and in 19 patients (37%) treated with the combination, with 15 surviving. Persistent fever was the main reason for changing treatment, and no patient died of a gram-positive infection. Subsequent infective events occurred in 16 patients (31%) given ceftazidime and in 25 patients (48%) given the combination. Lung infiltrates developed in 12 and 13 patients, respectively, but more new infections occurred in the combination group. Allergic skin reactions were also more frequent in this group. Thus, while teicoplanin provides simple, reliable, and safe treatment of patients with presumed gram-positive infections, it is not useful when given empirically to this patient population, and treatment may result in more infective complications and adverse events.     

Prospective randomized comparison of three antibiotic regimens for empirical therapy of suspected bacteremic infection in febrile granulocytopenic patients.

The standard regimen used by members of the European Organization for Research on Treatment of Cancer Antimicrobial Therapy Cooperative Group for empiric therapy of febrile neutropenic cancer patients has been treatment with ticarcillin plus amikacin. A three-arm prospective randomized controlled trial was performed to determine whether the extended-spectrum antipseudomonal penicillin azlocillin or the extended-spectrum cephalosporin cefotaxime had more or less efficacy than the beta-lactam in the ticarcillin-plus-amikacin regimen. A total of 742 patients from 22 institutions were evaluated. Single gram-negative rod bacteremias accounted for 83 episodes, and it was among these patients that the prognosis was least satisfactory, leading to a more intensive evaluation of this patient group. In these patients the azlocillin-plus-amikacin regimen resulted in a 66% response rate, compared with a 37% response rate for patients who received cefotaxime plus amikacin (P = 0.080) and a 47% response rate for patients who received ticarcillin plus amikacin (P = 0.207). The patients with gram-negative rod bacteremias and persistently profound granulocytopenia had substantially poorer response rates (37%) than the patients with rising granulocyte counts (73%; P = 0.004). A logistic regression analysis indicated that the following factors also affected infection resolution: beta-lactam utilization in the regimen (azlocillin was better than ticarcillin or cefotaxime), resolution of profound granulocytopenia (less than 100 cells per microliter) during therapy, and susceptibility to the beta-lactam antibiotic.     

Potential of mezlocillin as empiric single-agent therapy in febrile granulocytopenic cancer patients

Mezlocillin was used as an initial empiric antibiotic therapy for febrile (> 101 degrees F, ca. 38.33 degrees C) granulocytopenic (< 1,000/microliter) cancer patients. Patients known to be colonized with an organism resistant to 100 micrograms of mezlocillin per mol were excluded. The initial 25 cases (23 patients) received intravenous mezlocillin, 260 mg per kg per day in six divided doses; the mean 1-h-postinfusion serum level was 69 micrograms/ml. Because of the low serum level, the next 25 cases (22 patients) received 450 mg/kg per day, also in six divided doses, resulting in a mean 1-h-postinfusion serum level of 161 micrograms/ml. Both dosage regimens provided similar efficacy. Combined results show that 11 of 21 microbiologically documented infections and 7 of 13 clinically documented infections improved. Instances of bacteremia (number of cases in parentheses) were caused by Pseudomonas aeruginosa (two), Staphylococcus epidermidis (two), Clostridia perfringens (one), and Bacillus species (one); only one case improved. A rise in granulocyte count to > 500/microliters, a serum bactericidal activity of greater than or equal to 1:8 against the infecting pathogen, or both were indicators of a good therapeutic response. Despite exclusion of patients known to be previously colonized with mezlocillin-resistant organisms, 7 of 23 pathogens required a minimal concentration of greater than or equal to 100 micrograms of mezlocillin per ml for inhibition. In addition, surveillance cultures from 18 cases showed resistant organisms colonizing the gingiva, rectum, or both. Side effects of mezlocillin were minimal and included pseudoproteinuria, asymptomatic transient rise in bilirubin, and easily reversible kypokalemia. Mezlocillin, a new semisynthetic penicillin with little toxicity, was found to be inadequate as a single-agent empiric antibiotic therapy for febrile, granulocytopenic cancer patients.     

Prospective randomized evaluation of ciprofloxacin versus piperacillin plus amikacin for empiric antibiotic therapy of febrile granulocytopenic cancer patients with lymphomas and solid tumors. The European Organization for Research on Treatment of Cancer International Antimicrobial Therapy Cooperative Group.

Empiric therapy for febrile granulocytopenic patients is mandatory, but whether monotherapy is a safe alternative and whether fluoroquinolones are useful agents for this indication are still controversial issues. The use of monotherapy with intravenous ciprofloxacin (200 to 300 mg every 12 h) was evaluated against combined therapy with piperacillin plus amikacin in febrile granulocytopenic patients with solid tumor or lymphoma. The study was discontinued prematurely because patients treated with ciprofloxacin had a significantly lower overall success rate than patients treated with piperacillin plus amikacin (31 of 48 patients [65%] versus 48 of 53 patients [91%], P = 0.002). Patients with gram-positive coccal bacteremia had a particularly poor outcome: therapy failed for six of eight patients (75%) treated with ciprofloxacin, while therapy failed for none of four patients treated with piperacillin plus amikacin. Death from primary infection during initially randomized protocol therapy occurred in 7 of 48 patients (14.5%) treated with ciprofloxacin and in 3 of 53 (6%) treated with piperacillin plus amikacin. This study does not support the use of this dose of intravenous ciprofloxacin as empiric monotherapy for fever in granulocytopenic patients.     

Statistical considerations in clinical trials testing empiric antibiotic regimens in patients with febrile neutropenia

The Chalmers scoring system for assessing the quality of randomized controlled trials was applied to 19 papers (published in 1976–1984) reporting the results of trials of antibiotics in febrile neutropenic patients; it was found at the time of this survey (publication 1986) that statistical issues were inadequately addressed in the papers and that the scoring system was a measure of the quality of reporting in the papers rather than the quality of the actual trials. Some new items have been added to the system to improve the validity of results, and 15 more recent papers have been reviewed with reference to the updated scoring procedure, to find whether the quality of trials and of their reporting has improved since 1986. Further discussion of statistical issues in clinical trials is recommended.     

Economic aspects of empiric antibiotic therapy for febrile neutropenia in children with cancer

Several antibiotic regimens have been proposed worldwide for empiric treatment of febrile neutropenia in children with cancer, but none of them shows clear advantages in terms of clinical efficacy. Therefore, other parameters, including drug acquisition costs, should be considered in the selection of treatment. Children receive a "fraction" of a standard daily dose, and this fraction is generally calculated on the basis of body weight; therefore, the cost of each day of therapy is determined by the packages available for each single drug. We calculated the acquisition costs of various drugs proposed for the empiric treatment of febrile neutropenia in children with cancer, and then we estimated the daily cost of therapy referred to different patient weights. In general, the combination regimen with ceftriaxone plus aminoglycoside turned out to be less expensive than other regimens (including monotherapy with third-generation cephalosporins or carbapenems).     

Empirical antibacterial therapy in febrile, granulocytopenic bone marrow transplant patients

Fifty febrile, granulocytopenic allogeneic bone marrow transplant patients receiving prophylactic trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole were randomized to one of two empirical antibiotic regimens to determine whether a shortened course of empirical therapy was beneficial. Of the 50 patients, 25 received empirical tobramycin and ticarcillin for only 3 days, and 25 were maintained on empirical tobramycin and ticarcillin until they were afebrile and no longer granulocytopenic. Although the incidence of bacterial infections in the two groups was not statistically significantly different, almost twice as many bacterial infections were observed in the group that received the short course of empirical therapy. Furthermore, because of the high incidence of bacterial infection and clinical concerns about occult bacterial sepsis, within 2 weeks of the randomization the overall use of parenteral antibacterial agents was similar in both groups. The incidence of invasive fungal disease and the use of amphotericin B therapy were similar in both groups. The results of this study suggest that little clinical benefit is likely to be seen in bone marrow transplant patients treated with short-course empirical tobramycin and ticarcillin, despite the administration of prophylactic trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, and emphasize the need for new strategies to prevent infections with gram-positive and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole-resistant gram-negative bacteria in these patients.     

Criteria for response in patients in clinical trials of empiric antibiotic regimens for febrile neutropenia. Is there agreement?

A review of the literature on the criteria of response in patients on clinical trials of empiric antibiotic therapy revealed that there are at least three definitions utilized worldwide along with individual investigator definitions. The main definitions include definitions by Pizzo from the NCI, by the EORTC Antimicrobial group and by the Immunocompromised Host Society. The outcome in clinical trials can be affected by the definition used if the major endpoint in the study compares response rates of two or more initial empiric antimicrobial regimens for febrile neutropenia. Survival based definitions (Pizzo) are very useful but may not identify which regimen required the least number of modifications during the critical initial 3-5 days of trial. Evaluations later in the course of the febrile episode will not likely be influenced by these definitions as most patients with prolonged and severe neutropenia will eventually require modifications of therapy. A consensus to use a single response definition is necessary to allow comparisons and meta-analysis of results with specific antibiotic regimens for febrile neutropenia. These must be enforced by editors of major medical journals to truly allow this to happen.     

Combination antibiotic/rhG-CSF therapy for bacterially infected granulocytopenic patients

A clinical efficacy rate of 80.8% was obtained in 26 severely infected patients, neutropenic as a result of hematologic disease, following three-drug combination therapy with sulbactam/cefoperazone (SBT/CPZ), piperacillin (PIPC), and human recombinant granulocyte colony stimulating factor (rhG-CSF). By day 4 of treatment, patients average body temperature decreased from 38.6±0.8°C to 37.1±0.7°C and their neutrophil counts increased from 298±347/μL to 1757±2239/μL. When compared with 31 similar patients previously treated with SBT/CPZ and PIPC but without rhG-CSF, the efficacy rate in this study was somewhat higher but the difference was not statistically significant. However, there were statistically significant differences in body temperature on day 4 (37.1±0.7°C vs. 37.8±1.0°C) and in duration of fever in responding cases (3.1±1.7 vs. 4.8±2.4 days). These results suggest that addition of rhG-CSF provides a more rapid response and that the three-drug combination therapy can be selected as empiric therapy for infections in neutropenic patients.     

Teicoplanin as modification of initial empirical therapy in febrile granulocytopenic patients

Teicoplanin at a dose of 400 mg per day was added to the initial empirical therapy of 65 of 202 febrile granulocytopenic episodes. Of 53 cases evaluable for outcome 23 (43%) responded. Responders and nonresponders were comparable in terms of time of starting teicoplanin treatment, duration of therapy and of granulocytopenia, number of granulocytopenic days after therapy was stopped and peak and through concentrations of the drug. Teicoplanin was given most often because of persistent fever or initial Gram-positive bacteraemia and only one-third of these cases responded. However, when teicoplanin was given because of proven or presumed Gram-positive infection 67% of cases were treated successfully. Patients with skin and soft tissue infections achieved a 78% response rate. The development of a lung infiltrate was the most common reason for failure to respond, although in most instances the aetiology was not determined. Serum concentrations of teicoplanin were predictable; peak and trough concentrations on the fourth day were 30.4 +/- 5.0 mg/l and 9.8 +/- 1.7 mg/l, respectively. Concentrations achieved in individual patients did not correspond to outcome. Hearing loss of 20 dB at 800 Hz was noted in one of 15 cases and transient liver or kidney disturbances attributable to the drug were observed in 4% of cases. Teicoplanin therapy was safe but only effective when used to treat infective episodes with a high probability of being due to Gram-positive bacteria.     

Prospective, double-blind, randomized trial of teicoplanin versus vancomycin for the therapy of vascular access-associated bacteremia caused by gram-positive pathogens

Received: October 7, 1998 / Accepted: August 2, 1999     

Prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial comparing traditional versus reduced tidal volume ventilation in acute respiratory distress syndrome patients.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and potential efficacy of a mechanical ventilation strategy designed to reduce stretch-induced lung injury in acute respiratory distress syndrome. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial. SETTING: Eight intensive care units in four teaching hospitals. PATIENTS: Fifty-two patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome. INTERVENTIONS: Traditional tidal volume patients: tidal volume 10-12 mL/kg ideal body weight, reduced if inspiratory plateau pressure was > 55 cm H2O (7.3 kPa). Small tidal volume patients: tidal volume 5-8 mL/kg ideal body weight, to keep plateau pressure < 30 cm H2O (4.0 kPa). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Mean tidal volumes during the first 5 days in traditional and small tidal volume patients were 10.2 and 7.3 mL/kg, respectively (p < .001), with mean plateau pressure = 30.6 and 24.9 cm H2O (3.3 kPa), respectively (p < .001). There were no significant differences in requirements for positive end-expiratory pressure or FIO2, fluid intakes/outputs, requirements for vasopressors, sedatives, or neuromuscular blocking agents, percentage of patients that achieved unassisted breathing, ventilator days, or mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The reduced tidal volume strategy used in this study was safe. Failure to observe beneficial effects of small tidal volume ventilation treatment in important clinical outcome variables may have occurred because a) the sample size was too small to discern small treatment effects; b) the differences in tidal volumes and plateau pressures were modest; or c) reduced tidal volume ventilation is not beneficial.     

Prospective comparative trial of short course (four day) and continuous tobramycin in combination with cefoperazone or mezlocillin in febrile, granulocytopenic patients

In a prospective, randomized trial of 195 febrile episodes in granulocytopenic patients short course aminoglycoside treatment (initial tobramycin and cefoperazone followed by tobramycin discontinuation at day four of therapy) was compared with two regimens (tobramycin plus cefoperazone and tobramycin plus mezlocillin) in which both drugs were continued for up to 26 days. All regimens were successful as empirical therapy with comparable response rates of just over seventy per cent. Fifty-three per cent of the initial episodes of fever were related to documented infections which responded less well (P = 0.007) than unexplained fever. Patients with bacteraemia, pneumonia or Gram-positive aerobic or Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections responded poorly to all regimens. The recovery from granulocytopenia was the most important determinant of successful response. Aminoglycoside discontinuation followed by cefoperazone monotherapy after day four was statistically as effective as the combination regimens. Short course tobramycin therapy eliminated the nephrotoxicity seen in the combination limbs. The use of cefoperazone was not associated with an increased incidence of hypoprothrombinemia; however, the only three bleeding episodes occurred in patients given cefoperazone but not vitamin K. Short course aminoglycoside therapy will reduce cost and nephrotoxicity when compared with prolonged combination therapy and should be further explored in this setting, with use of different agents and comparison with monotherapy.     

A randomized trial of empirical antibiotic therapy with one of four beta-lactam antibiotics in combination with netilmicin in febrile neutropenic patients

Over a two year period 174 evaluable episodes of fever in neutropenic patients were treated in a randomized study comparing four beta-lactam antibiotics, each given in combination with netilmicin. Exclusions included episodes due to viral or fungal infection, and trial violations. Most patients were receiving treatment for leukaemia, including 18% undergoing bone marrow transplantation. The overall response rate (EORTC criteria) was 66%, ranging from 56% for cefoperazone to 76% for mezlocillin. Microbial documentation was obtained in 31% of episodes; Gram-positive isolates were most frequent but Pseudomonas aeruginosa was found in 18 patients. In patients with microbiologically documented infection 70% improved, overall--from 40% with cefoperazone to 80% with piperacillin (P less than 0.05). Nephrotoxicity was seen in 6.7% and was associated with severe documented sepsis. Hypokalaemia was seen in 29% and was most marked in patients receiving ticarcillin. Rashes occurred in 6.6% overall, with no difference between the groups. Ototoxicity, shown by serial audiograms, was seen in 4.7% of patients. No evidence of vestibular dysfunction was seen in 62 patients studied. Of thirteen deaths due to the primary infection, seven were caused by Ps. aeruginosa and five by fungi.     

Pharmacodynamic-based clinical pathway for empiric antibiotic choice in patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia

Background

Because of the high frequency of multidrug resistant bacteria in our intensive care units (ICUs), we implemented a ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) clinical pathway based on unit-specific minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) distributions and pharmacodynamic modeling in 3 of our ICUs.

Methods

This was a prospective, observational evaluation with a historical control group in adult patients (n = 168) who met clinical and radiologic criteria for VAP. Monte Carlo simulation was used to determine antibiotic regimens having the greatest likelihood of achieving bactericidal exposures against Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Antibiotic regimens were incorporated into an ICU-specific computerized clinical pathway as empiric agents of choice.

Results

Pharmacodynamic modeling found 3-hour infusions of cefepime 2 g every 8 hours or meropenem 2 g every 8 hours plus tobramycin and vancomycin would provide the greatest probability of empirically treating VAP in these ICUs. Infection-related mortality was reduced by 69% (8.5% vs 21.6%; P = .029), infection-related length of stay was shorter (11.7 ± 8.1 vs 26.1 ± 18.5; P < .001), and fewer superinfections were observed in patients treated on the pathway. A number of patients with nonsusceptible P aeruginosa were successfully treated with high-dose, 3-hour infusion regimens.

Conclusions

In our ICUs where multidrug resistant bacteria are common, an approach considering ICU-specific antibiotic MICs coupled with pharmacodynamic dosing strategies resulted in improved outcomes and shorter duration of treatments.     

Cefepime plus amikacin versus piperacillin-tazobactam plus amikacin for initial antibiotic therapy in haematology patients with febrile neutropenia: results of an open,randomized, multicentre trial

BACKGROUND: Standard therapy for suspected infections in patients with profound neutropenia is the combination of a beta-lactam antibiotic plus an aminoglycoside. Cefepime's broad-spectrum activity makes it an option for initial empirical therapy in neutropenic patients. The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of cefepime plus amikacin compared with piperacillin-tazobactam plus amikacin for initial empirical treatment of fever in adult haematology patients with severe neutropenia. METHODS: In this prospective multicentre trial, 969 patients with 984 febrile neutropenic episodes were randomized to receive iv amikacin (20 mg/kg every 24 h) combined with either cefepime (2 g every 8 h) or piperacillin-tazobactam (4 g/500 mg every 6 h). Clinical response was determined at 72 h and at completion of therapy. RESULTS: Eight hundred and sixty-seven episodes were assessable for efficacy (432 cefepime, 435 piperacillin-tazobactam). The frequency of success without modification of the empirical therapy was nearly identical for cefepime plus amikacin (49%) compared with piperacillin-tazobactam plus amikacin (51%). Similar rates of success were found for microbiologically documented infection: 40% versus 39%, respectively. Antibiotic modification was necessary in 49% of cefepime and 44% of piperacillin-tazobactam patients. The overall response rate, with or without modification of the assigned treatment, was 94% in both groups. Drug-related adverse events were reported in 10% of cefepime plus amikacin versus 11% of piperacillin-tazobactam plus amikacin patients. Mortality due to infection occurred in a total of 10 patients (two cefepime, eight piperacillin-tazobactam). CONCLUSION: The empirical regimen of cefepime plus amikacin is equivalent to piperacillin-tazobactam plus amikacin in febrile adult haematology patients with severe neutropenia. Keywords: cefepime, piperacillin-tazobactam, amikacin, empirical antibiotic therapy, febrile neutropenia, haematological malignancy     

Comparison of two antibiotic regimens (piperacillin plus amikacin versus ceftazidime plus amikacin) as empiric therapy for febrile neutropenic patients with cancer.

A total of 170 febrile episodes in neutropenic patients with cancer were randomly assigned to be treated with piperacillin-amikacin or ceftazidime-amikacin. The overall response rates were similar in both groups (68 and 65%, respectively). Response rates for clinically or microbiologically documented episodes were 54.5% for piperacillin-amikacin and 58.8% for ceftazidime-amikacin. Response rates for gram-negative bacillary infections were 65 and 73%, respectively. There was also no difference for gram-positive infections (31 and 50%, respectively). The toxicities were also comparable and consisted of skin rashes, hypokalemia, and diarrhea. Vancomycin was added if the fever persisted 72 h after the beginning of therapy; it increased the response rates to 94% when used with piperacillin-amikacin and 92% when used with ceftazidime plus amikacin. Our results suggest that the combinations show similar global efficacies in the treatment of febrile episodes in cancer patients.     

A prospective, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial of empirical teicoplanin in febrile neutropenia with persistent fever after imipenem monotherapy

Glycopeptide antibiotics are used extensively in the empirical treatment of febrile patients with neutropenia. To come to a more rational and restricted application of these expensive drugs and to reduce the risk of emergence of resistance, we carried out a prospective, double-blinded, placebo-controlled single-centre study to investigate whether the addition of teicoplanin improved the outcome of neutropenic patients who remained febrile after 72-96 h of imipenem monotherapy. Patients with known infections caused by imipenem-resistant microorganisms were excluded. From the 114 evaluable episodes (out of a total of 125) in 105 patients who met the eligibility criteria, 56 episodes were randomized to receive teicoplanin and 58 to placebo. At 72 h after the start of the assigned intervention, 52 (45.6%) of the patients were afebrile; at the end of the aplastic phase, 10 (8.8%) had succumbed. There was no difference between the two study arms. When febrile episodes were subdivided between microbiologically documented infections, clinically documented infections and fevers of unknown origin, again no significant differences were observed. With the exception of methicillin-resistant bacteria, Gram-positive infections seemed to respond well to imipenem monotherapy. It is concluded that the addition of teicoplanin on empirical grounds, i.e. for persistent fever only, is not necessary and that the use of glycopeptides should be restricted to well-defined clinical situations where methicillin-resistant bacteria are involved. Furthermore, it seems that many neutropenic patients respond slowly over more than 72-96 h even when they are treated with antibacterial drugs such as imipenem that are effective against the causative microorganism.     

Tobramycin and ticarcillin as empiric therapy for febrile patients with granulocytopenia: a reevaluation

The combination of tobramycin and ticarcillin is an established regimen used to empirically treat patients with granulocytopenia and fever. However, the clinician now has a plethora of newer alternative antibiotic combinations from which to choose. In this retrospective study of 25 granulocytopenic patients recently treated with tobramycin and ticarcillin, a combined favorable or partial response rate of 78% was achieved, without loss of efficacy over time as a result of emerging resistance of organisms. Our reevaluation of this antibiotic regimen emphasizes that it continues to be as efficacious and safe as newer antibiotic combinations, and supports its continued use until a newer regimen is shown to have significant advantages. This study also emphasizes the significance of staphylococci as pathogens in granulocytopenia, and suggests the need to add specific antistaphylococcal coverage whenever catheter-related infection is suspected.     

Effects of teicoplanin and those of vancomycin in initial empirical antibiotic regimen for febrile, neutropenic patients with hematologic malignancies. Gimema Infection Program.

The efficacy and toxicity of teicoplanin and vancomycin in the initial empirical antibiotic regimen in febrile, neutropenic patients with hematologic malignancies were compared in a prospective, randomized, unblinded, multicenter trial in the setting of 29 hematologic units in tertiary-care or university hospitals. A total of 635 consecutive febrile patients with hematologic malignancies and chemotherapy-induced neutropenia were randomly assigned to receive intravenously amikacin plus ceftazidime plus either teicoplanin at 6 mg/kg of body weight once daily or vancomycin at 1 g twice daily. An efficacy analysis was done for 527 evaluable patients: 275 treated with teicoplanin and 252 treated with vancomycin. Overall, successful outcomes were recorded for 78% of patients who received teicoplanin and 75% of those who were randomized to vancomycin (difference, 3%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -10 to 4%; P = 0.33). A total of 102 patients presented with primary, single-agent, gram-positive bacteremia. Coagulase-negative staphylococci accounted for 42%, Staphylococcus aureus accounted for 27%, and streptococci accounted for 21% of all gram-positive blood isolates. The overall responses to therapy of gram-positive bacteremias were 92 and 87% for teicoplanin and vancomycin, respectively (difference, 5%; CI, -17 to 6%; P = 0.22). Side effects, mainly represented by skin rash, occurred in 3.2 and 8% of teicoplanin- and vancomycin-treated patients, respectively (difference, -4.8%; CI, 0.7 to 8%; P = 0.03); the rate of nephrotoxicity was 1.4 and 0.8% for the teicoplanin and vancomycin groups, respectively (difference, 0.6%; CI, -2 to 1%; P = 0.68). Further infections were caused by gram-positive organisms in two patients (0.7%) treated with teicoplanin and one patient (0.4%) who received vancomycin (difference, 0.3%; CI, -0.9 to 1.0%; P = 0.53). Overall mortalities were 8.5 and 11% for teicoplanin- and vancomycin-treated patients, respectively (difference, -2.5%; CI, - 2 to 7%; P = 0.43); death was caused by primary gram-positive infections in three patients (1%) in each treatment group. When used for initial empirical antibiotic therapy in febrile, neutropenic patients, teicoplanin was at least as efficacious as vancomycin, but it was associated with fewer side effects.