Ceftazidime in combination with glycopeptide antibiotic is an effective first-line therapy for patients undergoing high-dose therapy with autologous peripheral blood stem cell support

 It was the objective of this study to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of an empirical antibiotic therapy consisting in ceftazidime and a glycopeptide antibiotic. All patients enrolled in the study had hematological malignancies and underwent high-dose therapy with peripheral blood stem cell (PBSC) support. In this retrospective study, 183 of 207 patients who had received a PBSC-supported high-dose therapy were evaluable. Any patients who had fever higher than 38.5  °C received ceftazidime in combination with vancomycin (105 patients) or teicoplanin (69 patients). In 80 of 174 patients with fever (45%) the fever resolved within 72 h as a result of the treatment with ceftazidime and the glycopeptide antibiotic. In nonresponding patients, the changes included the replacement of ceftazidime by imipenem/cilastin (94 patients) and the addition of erythromycin (12 patients) or metronidazole (3 patients). Amphotericin B was administered in 29 patients. Following hematological reconstitution, the fever and clinical signs, including radiographic findings, resolved in 20 primarily nonresponding patients. In blood cultures, a significantly higher incidence of gram-positive than of gram-negative bacteria was observed (26 vs 7). The toxicity of the first-line antibiotic therapy was limited to allergic skin reactions in 12 patients. Ceftazidime in combination with a glycopeptide antibiotic provides an effective and safe first-line therapy for patients with neutropenic fever following PBSC-supported high-dose therapy.     

Ceftazidime versus imipenem-cilastatin as initial monotherapy for febrile neutropenic patients.

One hundred febrile episodes in 89 neutropenic patients after cytotoxic chemotherapy were randomized to be treated with either ceftazidime or imipenem as initial monotherapy. The clinical characteristics of the two groups of patients were comparable. The response of the fever in patients who received imipenem was significantly better than that in those who received ceftazidime (77 versus 56%, respectively; P = 0.04), especially in those with microbiologically documented infection (81 versus 33%, respectively; P = 0.02). The in vitro susceptibilities and the clinical responses suggested that, with the possible exception of Pseudomonas spp., imipenem was more effective than ceftazidime in treating neutropenic infections caused by both gram-positive and -negative organisms. An additional 23 and 21% of the patients in the ceftazidime and imipenem groups, respectively, responded to the addition of cloxacillin and amikacin following failure of monotherapy. The majority of the treatment failures, relapses, and superinfections were related to resistant infective organisms such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus spp. and Pseudomonas spp. or disseminated fungal infections.     

Piperacillin-tazobactam is more effective than ceftriaxone plus gentamicin in febrile neutropenic patients with hematological malignancies: a randomized comparison

GOALS: Efficacy and costs of empirical antibacterial therapy in febrile neutropenic patients are important issues. Several strategies have been reported to be similarly effective: monotherapy with cefepime, ceftazidime or a carbapenem or duotherapy with an antipseudomonal beta-lactam antibiotic or ceftriaxone in combination with an aminoglycoside. Piperacillin-tazobactam monotherapy is promising, but its role in this setting still has to be defined. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Of 212 consecutive febrile episodes in 130 neutropenic patients with hematological malignancies randomized to receive either piperacillin-tazobactam (4.5 g every 8 h; group A) or ceftriaxone (2 g once daily plus gentamicin 5 mg/kg once daily; group B), 183 episodes (98 group A, 85 group B) were evaluable for response. RESULTS: Defervescence within 72 h without modification of the antibiotic therapy was achieved in 56/98 episodes (57.1%) in group A and in 30/85 (35.3%) in group B (P=0.0047). If fever persisted, teicoplanin plus gentamicin (group A) or teicoplanin plus ciprofloxacin (group B) were added. All patients still febrile then received meropenem, teicoplanin and amphotericin B. With these modifications of antibiotic therapy, 89.8% of patients in group A had responded at 21 days but only 71.8% in group B (P=0.005). The mean total antibiotic drug cost in group A was only 39.4% of that in group B (euro 445 versus euro 1129; P=0.010). CONCLUSION: Piperacillin-tazobactam monotherapy is significantly more effective and cost-efficient than ceftriaxone plus gentamicin as first-line therapy in febrile neutropenic patients with hematological malignancies.     

Monotherapy with piperacillin/tazobactam versus combination therapy with ceftazidime plus amikacin as an empiric therapy for fever in neutropenic cancer patients

Between July 1993 and September 1996, 107 consecutive febrile episodes in 83 neutropenic cancer patients with a median age of 41 years were randomized to treatment either with piperacillin/tazobactam 4.5 g every 8 h i.v. or ceftazidime 2 g every 8 h plus amikacin 15 mg/kg i.v. per day. In the case of fever >38° C 48 h after initiation of the antibiotic therapy, vancomycin 500 mg every 6 h i.v. was added. The study population was at serious risk of a poor outcome, since 67% of the patients had leukemia or lymphoma, 19% of the febrile events occurred after autologous bone marrow or blood stem cell transplantation, the median total duration of neutropenia was 16 days, and the median neutrophil count at study inclusion was 0.09 × 10⁹/l. The two patient groups were comparable in terms of risk factors. Bacteremia was found in 37%, other microscopically documented infections in 16%, and clinically documented infections in 26% of the febrile episodes. Most (96) febrile episodes were evaluable for response. No significant difference was found between piperacillin/ tazobactam and ceftazidime plus amikacin in terms of success rate (81% versus 83%), empirical addition of vancomycin (42% versus 38%), median time to fever defervescence (3.3 versus 2.9 days) or median duration of antibiotic therapy (7.2 versus 7.4 days). No patient died from the infection. Both antibiotic regimens were well tolerated, the study treatment being stopped only in 1 patient because of toxicity (cutaneous allergy to piperacillin/tazobactam). On the basis of the 107 febrile events encountered, we conclude that piperacillin/tazobactam is a safe and effective monotherapy. To define the definitive value of piperacillin/ tazobactam as a monotherapy for febrile neutropenic patients a large randomized trial is warranted.     

Domiciliary treatment of febrile episodes in cancer patients: a prospective randomized trial comparing oral versus parenteral empirical antibiotic treatment

Hospitalization and empirical broad-spectrum, intravenous antibiotics are the standard treatment for febrile cancer patients. Recent evidence supports the suggestion that febrile episodes in a low-risk population can be managed successfully in an outpatient setting, but the optimal drug regimen is unknown. In a prospective randomized clinical trial we compared ciprofloxacin 750 mg p.o. twice a day with ceftriaxone 2 g i.v. as a single daily dose for the empiric domiciliary treatment of febrile episodes in low-risk neutropenic and nonneutropenic cancer patients. A total of 173 patients, accounting for 183 febrile episodes, were enrolled in the study. Overall, successful outcomes were recorded for 76 of 93 (82%) febrile episodes in patients who were randomized to the oral regimen and for 68 of 90 (75%) febrile episodes in patients randomized to the i.v. regimen: this difference was not statistically significant. The success rate was similar in all subgroups of patients: neutropenic and nonneutropenic, with documented infection and with fever of unknown origin. There were 3 deaths in the group of patients treated with the parenteral regimen, and two of these were related to treatment failure. Both treatments were well tolerated, and the cost of the oral regimen was lower. This prospective study suggests that domiciliary antibiotic empiric monotherapy is feasible in febrile nonneutropenic or low-risk neutropenic outpatients in whom a bacterial infection is suspected, and that either an oral or a parenteral regimen can be used. A number of factors may influence the choice between an orally and an i.v.-administered antibiotic, but owing to the easier administration and lower cost, the oral regimen seems to be preferable. Published online: 5 March 1999     

Vancomycin is not an essential component of the initial empiric treatment regimen for febrile neutropenic patients receiving ceftazidime: a randomized prospective study.

The use of vancomycin as part of the initial antibiotic therapy of febrile neutropenic patients has become a controversial issue. Some studies support its incorporation in the initial regimen, and others suggest that vancomycin can be added later. We examined this issue in a prospective, randomized trial. We randomized 127 febrile neutropenic patients to receive either ceftazidime alone or ceftazidime plus vancomycin as the initial empiric antibiotic treatment. We added vancomycin to the ceftazidime arm of the study when fever persisted after 96 h of monotherapy, when new fever occurred after this time, or when a moderately ceftazidime-resistant gram-positive bacterium was isolated. Each of these regimens had similar initial response rates, similar durations of initial fever, similar frequencies of new fever during therapy, similar microbiological cure rates, similar superinfection rates, and similar survival rates. We observed more renal and cutaneous toxicities in patients receiving vancomycin and ceftazidime as initial therapy. We conclude that ceftazidime is appropriate as initial therapy for febrile neutropenic patients and that the addition of vancomycin is appropriate when fever persists after 4 days of monotherapy or when fever recurs following an initial response.     

Management of febrile neutropenia in solid tumours and lymphomas using the Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) risk index: feasibility and safety in routine clinical practice

Goals of work Febrile neutropenia (FN) represents a spectrum of severity in which low-risk patients can be defined using the Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) risk index. However, despite publication in 2000, there remains limited published literature to date to support the use of MASCC risk assessment in routine clinical practice and eligibility for early hospital discharge. In this study, we present our experience with the routine use of the MASCC risk index to determine the management of FN in our institution. Patients and methods Patients treated for solid tumours or lymphomas with low-risk FN (MASCC score ≥21) were eligible for oral antibiotics (ciprofloxacin plus either co-amoxiclav or doxycycline) and for early hospital discharge irrespective of first or subsequent episode. The primary outcome was rate of resolution of FN without serious medical complications (SMC). Secondary outcomes were the “success” of antibiotic therapy without treatment modifications, duration of hospitalisation and rate of readmissions. Results A total of 100 FN episodes occurring in 83 patients were treated over a 6-month period. Ninety of these episodes were low-risk (90%), of which 75 received oral antibiotics (83.3%) and 3 (3.3%) experienced SMC, and the success rate was 94.5% [95% confidence interval (CI) 89.6–99.3%] in low-risk episodes. The median duration of hospitalisation was 2.5 days (25th centile: 1.0 day; 75th centile: 5.0 days) in low-risk compared to 6.5 days (25th centile: 5.3 days; 75th centile: 9.3 days) in high-risk episodes (p = 0.003); 2 days for low-risk episodes treated with oral antibiotics compared to 4 days for low-risk receiving intravenous antibiotics (p = 0.015). Positive predictive value for the MASCC index was 96.7% (95% CI 95.0–98.6%). Conclusion The MASCC risk index is both feasible and safe when used in standard clinical practice to guide the management of FN in patients with solid tumours and lymphomas. Patients predicted to have low risk can be managed safely with oral antibiotics and early hospital discharge.     

Piperacillin/tazobactam plus tobramycin versus ceftazidime plus tobramycin as empiric therapy for fever in severely neutropenic patients

The objective of this trial was to evaluate the potential advantages of the combination of piperacillin and tazobactam in the control of fever in neutropenic patients. In this single-center study, patients who experienced a total of 247 febrile episodes were prospectively randomized to receive either our standard regimen, ceftazidime 3 g/day (1 g t.i.d.) plus tobramycin 3 mg/kg per day (1.5 mg/kg b.i.d.), or piperacillin 12 g/day plus tazobactam 1.5 g/day (4 g+0.5 g t.i.d.) plus tobramycin 3 mg/kg per day (1.5 mg/kg b.i.d.). Vancomycin was added in all cases of persistent fever in the ceftazidime arm, but only when there was microbiologically documented resistance in the piperacillin/tazobactam arm. All 247 episodes were evaluable by "intent-to-treat" analysis. The two populations were well matched in terms of age, gender, underlying disease, chemotherapy received, oral decontamination, clinical and bacterial documentation, and severity and duration of neutropenia. Initial antibacterial therapy was successful (apyrexia at 72 h, without antibiotic change) more frequently (P=0.008) with the regimen containing piperacillin/tazobactam (54.4%) than with the one including ceftazidime (37.6%). Fewer (P=0.02) major infectious events (infectious death or delay in treatment of underlying disease due to infection) were observed during piperacillin/ tazobactam treatment (2.6%) than with the ceftazidime regimen (11.3%), despite a lower frequency of glycopeptide addition when piperacillin/tazobactam was used (54.4% versus 77.4%) according to the rules adopted. This trial confirmed the efficacy of the piperacillin/tazobactam combination for empirical treatment of febrile neutropenic patients. This antibiotic combination permitted a dramatic decrease in empiric glycopeptide antibiotic administration in such patients. Electronic publication: 12 January 1999     

Ceftazidime plus mezlocillin as initial antibiotic therapy in febrile neutropenic patients with haematological malignancy

Sixty episodes of fever in neutropenic patients with haematological malignancy were treated with ceftazidime and mezlocillin. Improvement or temporary improvement was seen in 76% of patients with microbiologically or clinically documented infection. Fifty-seven per cent of episodes due to bacteraemia improved with the antibiotics. Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus were the commonest pathogens isolated; bacteraemia due to Staph. epidermis was not encountered. The toxicity of ceftazidime plus mezlocillin was acceptable. Diarrhoea developed in 12% and a skin rash in 10%.     

Clinical evaluation of monotherapy with cefpirome for infections complicating hematological disorders

The clinical effects of cefpirome (CPR) monotherapy were evaluated in 38 infected patients with hematological diseases. The underlying diseases of the patients were chiefly acute leukemia, myelodysplastic syndrome, malignant lymphoma, and aplastic anemia, and 18 patients were clinically neutropenic (<500 neutrophils/μL). Septicemia, pneumonia, or an unexplained fever, were the predominant complicating infections. The clinical efficacy of CPR was satisfactory or improved in 89.5% of patients. When compared to empirical combination therapy with 2 antibiotics, monotherapy with CPR reduced the drip infusion volume and the frequency of antibiotic administration, resulting in a better quality of life due to less frequent night urination, a low cost/benefit ratio, and reduction in nursing responsibilities. Due to this high efficacy rate, monotherapy with CPR should be considered as a front-line therapeutic approach in patients with infections accompanying hematological diseases, particularly those with neutropenia.     

Randomized prospective study of ceftazidime versus ceftazidime plus cephalothin in empiric treatment of febrile episodes in severely neutropenic patients.

In a prospective randomized study, ceftazidime monotherapy was compared with a combination of ceftazidime plus cephalothin in 102 febrile neutropenic patients. Thirty bacteriologically documented infections, of which 23 were bacteremias, in 48 clinically assessable patients were treated with ceftazidime alone. Twenty-four bacteriologically proven infections, of which 18 were bacteremias, in 42 clinically assessable patients were treated with a combination of ceftazidime and cephalothin. The clinical response rates in assessable patients were 77% for ceftazidime monotherapy and 88% for the combination. The bacteriological clearance rate was 70% for ceftazidime monotherapy and 79% for the combination. Efficacy against gram-negative pathogens appeared to be excellent, with 93% clearance for ceftazidime monotherapy and 100% clearance for the combination. The bacteriological clearance of gram-positive infections was only 60% for both regimens, with failures mainly due to Streptococcus faecalis and Streptococcus sanguis, which are primarily resistant to both ceftazidime and cephalothin. After addition of vancomycin to those infections which did not respond to empiric therapy, bacteriological clearance rates of 94% (ceftazidime plus vancomycin) and 90% (ceftazidime and cephalothin plus vancomycin) were achieved. Three superinfections were registered in the ceftazidime group and two were seen in the combination group. Other adverse effects of ceftazidime were minimal and were not enhanced by combination with cephalothin. It is concluded that ceftazidime is an effective drug for the empiric treatment of febrile neutropenic patients, especially if one is prepared to modify therapy if resistant gram-positive strains or mycotic infections are encountered. Neither the clinical nor bacteriological cure rates could be substantially improved by adding cephalothin to ceftazidime in initial empiric treatment of febrile neutropenic patients.     

Prospective study of empiric monotherapy with ceftazidime for low-risk grade IV febrile neutropenia after cytotoxic chemotherapy in cancer patients

PURPOSE: It was the aim of this study to evaluate the results of a prospective study in a single medical center using ceftazidime monotherapy in cancer patients with chemotherapy-induced grade IV febrile neutropenia and a low risk for gram-negative bacteremia. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Thirty-eight patients were admitted with low-risk grade IV febrile neutropenia after chemotherapy for solid tumors. The median patient age was 57 years (range 18-74). Sixteen patients (42%) developed febrile neutropenia after the first cycle of current chemotherapy line, 9 patients (24%) received 2-3 cycles and 13 patients (34%) received more than 3 chemotherapy cycles before manifesting febrile neutropenia. Five patients were treated with prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor commenced 24 h after completion of the chemotherapy cycle. Empiric monotherapy with intravenous ceftazidime was started on admission and administered 2 g every 8 h. RESULTS: The mean polymorphic nuclear cell count on admission was 231 cells/mm(3). Ceftazidime therapy was well tolerated. Twenty-five (66%) patients responded with clinical improvement and complete resolution of fever within 48 h after initiation of ceftazidime therapy. Thirty-two (84%) patients were afebrile after 72 h of therapy. Thirty-three patients (87%) remained on unmodified ceftazidime therapy throughout their hospitalization. Five patients (13%) subsequently required modification of the treatment regimen for various reasons. Mean duration of fever and neutropenia were 2 (1-10) days and 4 (1-11) days, respectively. None of the patients discontinued therapy because of adverse effects. No positive blood cultures were obtained. No events of septic shock were observed. Mean duration of hospitalization was 6 days (range 3-12). CONCLUSION: In our series, monotherapy with intravenous ceftazidime appears safe and effective in cancer patients with low-risk grade IV febrile neutropenia after cytotoxic chemotherapy and may appreciably reduce antibiotics costs.     

Procalcitonin – a sensitive inflammation marker of febrile episodes in neutropenic children with cancer

Objective Sensitive parameters of inflammations, are rare or of limited validity in neutropenic patients. Procalcitonin (PCT) proven to be a sensitive inflammatory marker in nonneutropenic patients was evaluated for its diagnostic relevance in febrile episodes of neutropenic patients with cancer Methods Plasma levels of PCT were determined by an immunoluminometric assay in children with febrile neutropenic episodes (n=376) starting at the date of admission until the resolution of fever and were correlated with serum levels of the C-reactive protein (CrP). Febrile episodes were classified as fever of unknown origin (FUO), microbiologically or clinically documented infections and were also differentiated according to the site of the infection (unknown, bacteremia, respiratory, soft tissue, gastrointestinal and urinary tract infection). Results Independently from the aetiology and the site of infection the PCT peak value occurred mostly on the second hospital day and decreased rapidly in cases of successful antibiotic therapy and with the resolution of fever to the normal range (0.1–0.5 μg/l). The highest PCT peak levels at the onset of fever and during the febrile course were observed in patients with gramnegative bacteremia (n=22, median 12.1 μg/l, range 0.4–568.2 μg/l). There was a positive correlation between PCT peak levels and CrP peak levels (r=0.48, p=0.001) which mostly were observed 24 h later than for PCT. Conclusions PCT is a sensitive and specific parameter in the diagnostic and in the sequential assessment of febrile neutropenic episodes, especially in gramnegative infections. Its diagnostic accuracy in neutropenic patients is clearly higher than that of CrP.     

Treatment of febrile neutropenia with cefepime monotherapy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The empirical administration of a broad-spectrum beta-lactam antibiotic, either as monotherapy or in combination with an aminoglycoside, is an essential component of the initial management of patients with fever and severe neutropenia. Multiple antibiotics have been tested for this indication. Cefepime is a fourth-generation cephalosporin with in vitro activity against most gram-negative and many gram-positive bacteria. We have studied the use of this agent as monotherapy in this indication. METHODS: One hundred and twenty-six episodes of febrile neutropenia in 98 adults with hematological malignancies were treated with cefepime monotherapy. Cefepime was given at a dose of 2 g every 8 h i.v. Most episodes (49%) were fever of unexplained origin, while a microbiologically documented and clinically documented infection occurred in 25% episodes each. Seventy-six (61%) episodes occurred after conventional chemotherapy, while 51 (41%) after a hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Results: Twelve episodes (10%) were not evaluable for response. Among the 114 evaluable episodes, 69 (55% of the initial sample and 61% of those evaluable) responded to cefepime monotherapy, while therapy failed in 45 cases (36% of the initial sample and 39% of those evaluable), including 14 cases who developed breakthrough bacteremia during therapy. There were no deaths due to bacterial infection. At the end of all antibiotic therapy (final outcome) 69 episodes were cured only with monotherapy, 47 were cured with modification of therapy and 10 patients died from an unrelated cause. The only variable that appeared to correlate with response to therapy was the duration of neutropenia, which was longer among patients who failed or developed breakthrough bacteremia than among those who responded to monotherapy. INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS: Initial empirical antibiotic therapy with cefepime as a single agent in patients with febrile neutropenia and a hematological malignancy is effective, but patients with prolonged neutropenia appear to be at higher risk for failure. However, with appropriate therapeutic changes the risk of dying from a bacterial infection is very low.     

Ceftriaxone versus β-lactams with antipseudomonal activity for empirical, combined antibiotic therapy in febrile neutropenia: a meta-analysis

 The object of this work was to compare the efficacy of antibiotic combinations including ceftriaxone with that of combinations including an antipseudomonal β-lactam for the empirical treatment of febrile neutropenia in cancer patients. We identified all published randomised trials comparing two antibiotic combinations differing only in the β-lactam, being ceftriaxone in one treatment group and an antipseudomonal β-lactam in the other. The quality of individual trials was formally evaluated. A meta-analysis was performed using the Peto-modified Mantel-Haenszel method for combining binary data. Primary analysis was done, for both febrile episodes and bacteraemic episodes, using failure of empirical antibiotic treatment defined as modification of the initial allocated regimen or death during treatment. Secondary analysis was done using death from any cause in the two treatment groups. Data relating to 1,537 febrile neutropenic episodes recorded in eight randomised clinical trial were pooled s. Overall, there were 256 treatment failures out of 782 febrile episodes treated with ceftriaxone-containing combinations (32.7%), and 243 out of 755 treated with antipseudomonal β-lactam regimens (32.1%). The pooled odds ratio of failure for ceftriaxone-containing combinations for febrile episodes was 1.04, with the 95% confidence interval ranging from 0.84 to 1.29, and that for bacteraemic episodes was 0.93 (95% confidence interval 0.58–1.49). With regard to overall mortality, there were 54 deaths among 782 febrile episodes treated with ceftriaxone-containing combinations (6.9%) and 62 deaths among 755 febrile episodes treated with antipseudomonal β-lactam-containing regimens (8.2%). The pooled odds ratio of death for ceftriaxone regimens was 0.84 (95% confidence interval 0.57–1.24). Results of this meta-analysis show that in the empirical treatment of febrile neutropenia, antibiotic combinations containing ceftriaxone are as effective as those in which the β-lactam has specific activity against Pseudomonas aeruginosa, such as ureidopenicillin or ceftazidime. Published online: 5 October 1999     

Meropenem versus ceftazidime as empirical monotherapy in febrile neutropenia of paediatric patients with cancer

This trial assessed the efficacy and safety of meropenem versus ceftazidime as empirical monotherapy for febrile neutropenia in paediatric cancer patients. In a prospective randomized study, 172 evaluable febrile episodes in the meropenem arm and 170 episodes in the ceftazidime arm were analysed for the clinical and microbiological response dependent on the kind of infection. About half the episodes were classified as fever of unknown origin (FUO) and the remainder as microbiologically or clinically documented infections. The most frequently documented infections in both arms were bacteraemias (22.1 versus 26.5%), predominantly caused by Gram-positive organisms (57.9 versus 71.1%). The success rate of the initial monotherapy differed significantly between the two arms and was 55.8% in the meropenem and 40.0% in the ceftazidime arm (P = 0.003). In addition, a significantly longer duration of fever and of antimicrobial therapy was observed in the ceftazidime arm than in the meropenem arm (median 5 versus 4 days, P = 0.022, and 7 versus 6 days, P = 0.009, respectively). With respect to the kind of infection, differences between the two arms were significant only in episodes classified as FUO but not in documented infections. In both arms, side effects were minimal. Despite the greater response rate for meropenem in FUO, the fact that ceftazidime has been proven to be as effective as meropenem in documented infections in the present study suggests that both drugs are useful as empirical monotherapy in febrile paediatric cancer patients.     

Piperacillin, beta-lactam inhibitor plus gentamicin as empirical therapy of a sequential regimen in febrile neutropenia of pediatric cancer patients

The beta-lactam/beta-lactamase inhibitor combinations are a good choice for empirical antimicrobial therapy in febrile neutropenic patients, because their antibacterial spectra include both gram-negative and gram-positive pathogens. This trial was initiated to assess the efficacy and safety of piperacillin with the beta-lactam inhibitors sulbactam (PSG group) or tazobactam (PTG group) and gentamicin as initial therapy in febrile neutropenia of pediatric patients. In a prospective study, 239 episodes of fever and neutropenia were analyzed for the clinical and microbiological response dependent on infection etiology and treatment group: 66.5% of episodes were classified as fever of unknown origin (FUO) and 33.5%, as microbiologically or clinically documented infections; 19.2% of all episodes were due to bacteremia, predominantly caused by gram-positive organisms (69.6%). The response to the initial therapy was 55.2% overall and 65.4% in episodes of FUO with a significant higher success rate in the PSG group than in the PTG group (70.1% vs. 52.4%, P=0.039), and 35.0% in documented infections. In episodes with documented infection longer duration of fever and antimicrobial therapy was recorded than for FUO episodes. Four patients died of causes related to infection. Fever relapse occurred in 26 episodes (11.1%), predominantly in patients who were still neutropenic. Toxic side effects were minimal. The initial therapy of piperacillin with sulbactam or tazobactam in combination with gentamicin is well tolerated, and its efficacy is comparable to that of other combination therapies or of monotherapy with beta-lactam antibiotics in pediatric neutropenic cancer patients.     

Resource implications of febrile neutropenia in cancer patients

 No previous study has compared countries with respect to differences in clinical practice and resource use of cancer patients with febrile neutropenic episodes (FNE). The purpose of this international, cross-sectional pilot study conducted in tertiary care centers across Europe, Brazil and Australia was to evaluate the resource use attributable to febrile neutropenia in different countries. A total of 17 centers from eight countries provided 128 patients. The leading malignant disorders were hematological malignancies (n=47), lymphomas (n=27), and breast cancer (n=26). The median length of duration of FNE was 4 days (interquartile range, 3–8). The incidence density of antimicrobial exposure was 4.691 days of antimicrobial therapy per 1,000 days of FNE. There were 23 patients who received a total of 280 days of G-CSF therapy. On average, 5 (±5.4) blood samples per patient were drawn and cultured. The most common diagnostic radiographic test was the chest X-ray, with a total of 224 such examinations performed in 82 patients. We conducted an international cross-sectional study on resource implications of febrile neutropenia in cancer patients. The records of the febrile neutropenic patients included in this study reflect clinical practice in a heterogeneous, international patient population, treated with modern supportive care and early empiric antibiotics by clinicians at different levels of expertise. Published online: 22 July 1999     

Itraconazole is not effective for the prophylaxis of fungal infections in patients with neutropenia

 Fungal infections are a major problem among patients with hematological malignancies. To evaluate the efficacy of itraconazole (200 mg twice daily) in the prophylaxis of fungal infections in neutropenic patients, we conducted a prospective trial. A total of 61 patients with acute leukemia (113 cytotoxic chemotherapy episodes) were enrolled in the study. One patient in the itraconazole group was excluded because itraconazole was not taken due to gastrointestinal hemorrhage. Because the duration of neutropenia (neutrophil count, <0.5 × 10⁹/l) did not reach 7 days, 3 (1 patient) and 13 (4 patients) cytotoxic chemotherapy episodes in the itraconazole and control groups, respectively, were excluded. After these exclusions, the study population consisted of 31 patients (54 cytotoxic chemotherapy episodes) who had taken itraconazole and 24 patients (43 cytotoxic chemotherapy episodes) who had not taken itraconazole. Prophylactic treatment was initiated on the first day of chemotherapy and was continued until the end of the neutropenic period (absolute neutrophil count, >1 × 10⁹/l) unless a systemic fungal infection was documented or suspected. Thirteen episodes (24%) in the itraconazole group and 7 episodes (16%) in the control group proceeded to intravenous amphotericin B (P > 0.05). Fungal infections occurred in 9 episodes (17%) in the itraconazole group and in 5 episodes (12%) in the control group (P > 0.05). Overall mortality was five deaths in the itraconazole group and two in the control group. These deaths were not due to clinically documented fungal infection. In our study, efficacy of itraconazole in the prophylaxis of fungal infections in neutropenic patients was not detected. Received: March 25, 2002 / Accepted: October 1, 2002     

Febrile neutropenia: a prospective study to validate the Multinational Association of Supportive Care of Cancer (MASCC) risk-index score

Objective The objective of this study was to prospectively validate the Multinational Association of Supportive Care of Cancer (MASCC) risk-index score in an attempt to accurately predict on presentation with febrile neutropenia those cancer patients who are at low- or high-risk for development of serious medical complications during the episode.Patients and methods Patients who presented with febrile neutropenia during November 2000 and July 2002 were prospectively enrolled in the protocol. All patients were hospitalized until recovery or outcome of the event and were treated with broad-spectrum, empiric, intravenous antibiotic therapy. The MASCC risk-index score (based on seven independent factors present at onset of febrile neutropenia) was calculated in 64 patients with 80 febrile neutropenic episodes. Patients with a score of 21 were regarded as low risk; patients with a score of <21 were regarded as high risk.Results Of the 80 febrile neutropenic episodes, 58 were classified as low-risk and 22 as high-risk patients. Fifty-seven (98.3%) of the 58 low-risk patients recovered without complications, and three (13.6%) of the 22 high-risk patients did not develop medical complications. One low-risk patient developed a fungal infection but recovered completely in comparison to 11 high-risk patients (50%) who developed serious medical complications (p<0.001). None of the low-risk patients died. However, eight (36.4%) of the 22 high-risk patients died during the febrile neutropenic episode (p<0.001), six as a consequence of sepsis and two due to rapidly uncontrolled cancer.Conclusion We correctly predicted 98.3% of low-risk patients and 86.3% of high-risk patients. This study had a positive predictive value of 98.3% and a negative predictive value of 86.4% with both a sensitivity and specificity of 95%. The MASCC risk-index score correctly identifies low- and high-risk patients at presentation with febrile neutropenia.