Monotherapy or aminoglycoside-containing combinations for empirical antibiotic treatment of febrile neutropenic patients: a meta-analysis

We set out to compare the efficacy of antibiotic monotherapy with that of combination therapy including an aminoglycoside for empirical treatment of febrile neutropenic cancer patients. We did a meta-analysis of 29 randomised clinical trials pooling data from 4795 febrile episodes and a subset of 1029 bacteraemic episodes by both fixed and random effects models. Outcome measure was clinical failure of antibiotic treatment, defined as modification of the initially allocated regimen or death during treatment. In febrile episodes, the pooled odds ratio (OR) of clinical failure with monotherapy versus combination therapy was 0.88, with 95% CI from 0.78 to 0.99 by the fixed effects model, and 0.87 with 95% CI from 0.75 to 1.01 by the more conservative random effects model. For bacteraemic episodes, the pooled OR of failure with monotherapy was 0.70 (0.54 to 0.92) by the fixed effects model, and 0.72 (0.54 to 0.95) by the random effects model. We conclude that monotherapy has been as effective as aminoglycoside-containing combinations for empirical treatment of febrile neutropenia.     

Ceftazidime as initial therapy in febrile patients with acute leukemia during induction chemotherapy. Leukemia Group of Middle Sweden.

We studied the efficacy of ceftazidime as initial monotherapy in 82 adult patients with acute leukemia who developed 123 febrile episodes during induction chemotherapy. 88% of the patients survived their febrile episode(s), whereas 10% died of infection. When assessed at 72 h after initiation of treatment (early evaluation), 43/123 episodes (35%) had been successfully treated with ceftazidime. These 43 favourable responses were seen in 15/47 (32%) microbiologically documented infections, 20/46 (43%) clinically defined infections, and 8/30 (27%) fever of unknown origin (FUO). At the resolution of fever (late evaluation) 115 episodes were evaluable, and 48% had responded successfully to ceftazidime. Successful treatment was most frequently observed in FUO, 18/29 (62%). In contrast, only 19/44 (43%) microbiologically documented infections and 18/42 (43%) clinically defined infections were cured during ceftazidime treatment. In bacteremia the response rate was only 8/26 (31%). Thus, this study shows that although ceftazidime can be safely used for initial empirical monotherapy in neutropenic leukemia patients, the need for therapy modification is high and few patients with serious infections are cured with ceftazidime alone.     

Cefepime versus ceftazidime as empirical therapy for fever in neutropenic patients with haematological malignancies

An open randomized comparative study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of Cefepime (2 gm iv. 8 hr.) vs. ceftazidime (2 gm iv. every 8 hr.) in empirical therapy of febrile neutropenic patients. A total of 40 eligible febrile episodes were randomized to be treated with study regimen. Twenty febrile episodes were treated with cefepime and 20 were treated with ceftazidime. The two groups were comparable in terms of age, sex, height, underlying neoplasm, number of pretherapy neutrophils, duration of neutropenia. The overall therapeutic success rate of cetepime group (60%) was comparable to that of ceftazidime group (55%). The results of this study suggest that cefepime is an effective and safe agent in empirical therapy of febrile episode in neutropenic patient and its efficacy is comparable with that of ceftazidime.     

A comparison of imipenem to ceftazidime with or without amikacin as empiric therapy in febrile neutropenic patients.

BACKGROUND--Neutropenic patients with cancer are traditionally treated with empiric antibiotic combinations when they become febrile. The availability of broad-spectrum antibiotics such as ceftazidime and imipenem has made it possible to initiate therapy with a single agent (monotherapy). The objectives of this trial were to compare ceftazidime and imipenem as single agents for the therapy of febrile episodes in neutropenic patients and to ascertain whether the addition of an aminoglycoside (amikacin) to either of these agents would provide an advantage. METHODS--A prospective clinical trial was conducted in which eligible neutropenic patients with cancer were randomized to one of four treatment arms: ceftazidime alone; imipenem alone; ceftazidime plus amikacin; and imipenem plus amikacin. Efficacy analysis was done for 750 assessable episodes. A multivariate logistic-regression analysis was also performed to examine the unique contribution of various prognostic factors. RESULTS--The overall response rates were 76% with imipenem plus amikacin, 72% with imipenem, 71% with ceftazidime plus amikacin, and 59% with ceftazidime alone. Single-organism gram-positive infections occurred in 101 of 750 episodes. Without a change in antibiotics, the response rates were 50% with imipenem, 40% with imipenem plus amikacin, 39% with ceftazidime plus amikacin, and 38% with ceftazidime. Most responded to vancomycin or other antibiotics, and the mortality associated with gram-positive infections was only 5%. Regardless of the antibiotic regimen, the majority of uncomplicated gram-negative infections responded to therapy and the majority of complicated gram-negative infections failed to respond. Multivariate logistic-regression analysis showed that recovery of the neutrophil count was the most favorable prognostic factor in a patient's response to infection, whereas the presence of gram-positive infection, acute leukemia, pulmonary or enteric infection, and therapy with ceftazidime were unfavorable factors. CONCLUSIONS--Single-agent therapy with imipenem is as effective as more conventional combination antibiotic therapy for the empirical treatment of febrile episodes in neutropenic patients with cancer.     

Ceftazidime as first-line therapy for fever in acute leukaemia

Fifty patients with acute non-lymphocytic leukaemia were treated by random allocation with either ceftazidime alone or a combination of piperacillin, netilmicin and cefotaxime for 65 febrile neutropenic episodes. Nineteen of 33 patient episodes (58%) responded to ceftazidime alone compared with 21 of 32 episodes (66%) treated with the combination. There was one infective death in a patient given the combination; rates of documented superinfection were low. The treatment groups appeared identical in terms of patient demography, underlying disease and other risk factors, though patients with a clinical site of infection responded more slowly than those without. Bacteraemia per se did not appear to influence outcome. Bactericidal serum concentrations greater than or equal to 8 X the minimum bactericidal concentration were predictive of a rapid response (within 4 days) to antibiotics. Furthermore, serum from patients treated with ceftazidime maintained adequate cidal activity against Pseudomonas aeruginosa for longer than that obtained from patients treated with the three-drug combination. Ceftazidime was shown to be a safe and effective alternative to the three-drug combination for the initial management of febrile neutropenic episodes in leukaemic patients.     

Predictive factors of septic shock and mortality in neutropenic patients

Neutropenia is a major risk factor for developing a serious infection. Bacteremia still causes significant mortality among neutropenic patients with cancer. The purpose of this study was to identify risk factors for septic shock and for mortality in neutropenic patients with leukemia and bacteremia. Consecutive samples from 20 patients with acute myeloid leukemia and bacteremia were studied during a 1 year period (January-December 2003). All patients received empirical antibiotic therapies for febrile episodes using ceftazidime plus amikacin. About 110 neutropenic febrile episodes were noted: clinically documented 14.54%, microbiologically documented 16.36% and fever of unknown origin 69.09%. Gram-negative organism caused eight febrile episodes: Pseudomonas (5), Klebsiella (3). Gram-positive organism caused 10 episodes: Staphylococcus (6), Streptococci (2), Enterococci (2). Pulmonary infection accounted for 25% of clinically documented infections. About 14 of the 110 febrile episodes were associated with septic shock causing mortality in 7 patients. In a univariate analysis variables associated with septic shock were: pulmonary infection (OR = 17, p = 0.001), serum bicarbonate < 17 mmol/l (OR = 68, p < 0.001) and serum lactate >3 mmol/l (OR = 62, p < 0.001). Variables associated with mortality were: pulmonary infection (OR = 83, p < 0.001) and serum bicarbonate < 17 mmol/l (OR = 61, p < 0.001). In a multivariate analysis two variables were associated with septic shock: pulmonary infection (OR = 5, p = 0.043) and serum lactate >3 mmol/l (OR = 10, p = 0.003). An elevated serum lactate (>3 mmol/l) and low serum bicarbonate ( < 17 mmol/l) at the onset of bacteremia are useful biomarkers in predicting septic shock and mortality in neutropenic patients.     

Predictive factors of septic shock and mortality in neutropenic patients

Neutropenia is a major risk factor for developing a serious infection. Bacteremia still causes significant mortality among neutropenic patients with cancer. The purpose of this study was to identify risk factors for septic shock and for mortality in neutropenic patients with leukemia and bacteremia. Consecutive samples from 20 patients with acute myeloid leukemia and bacteremia were studied during a 1 year period (January–December 2003). All patients received empirical antibiotic therapies for febrile episodes using ceftazidime plus amikacin. About 110 neutropenic febrile episodes were noted: clinically documented 14.54%, microbiologically documented 16.36% and fever of unknown origin 69.09%. Gram-negative organism caused eight febrile episodes: Pseudomonas (5), Klebsiella (3). Gram-positive organism caused 10 episodes: Staphylococcus (6), Streptococci (2), Enterococci (2). Pulmonary infection accounted for 25% of clinically documented infections. About 14 of the 110 febrile episodes were associated with septic shock causing mortality in 7 patients. In a univariate analysis variables associated with septic shock were: pulmonary infection (OR = 17, p = 0.001), serum bicarbonate < 17 mmol/l (OR = 68, p < 0.001) and serum lactate >3 mmol/l (OR = 62, p < 0.001). Variables associated with mortality were: pulmonary infection (OR = 83, p < 0.001) and serum bicarbonate < 17 mmol/l (OR = 61, p < 0.001).

In a multivariate analysis two variables were associated with septic shock: pulmonary infection (OR = 5, p = 0.043) and serum lactate >3 mmol/l (OR = 10, p = 0.003). An elevated serum lactate (>3 mmol/l) and low serum bicarbonate (< 17 mmol/l) at the onset of bacteremia are useful biomarkers in predicting septic shock and mortality in neutropenic patients.     

Prospective evaluation of procalcitonin in adults with febrile neutropenia after haematopoietic stem cell transplantation

Serum procalcitonin (PCT) levels have been proposed as a new discriminative marker for bacterial and fungal infections. We analysed the diagnostic relevance of PCT in febrile episodes of neutropenic adult patients after haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). PCT was determined prospectively in 92 febrile episodes, classified according to the final diagnosis as: neutropenic fever of unknown origin (n = 51), microbiological (n = 26) or clinical (n = 5) documented infection and non-infectious febrile episodes (n = 10). On first day of fever, mean (+/- SD) PCT level was 0.3 ng/ml (0.2) in neutropenic fever of unknown origin, 0.5 ng/ml (0.7) in microbiologically confirmed infections, 0.2 ng/ml (0.2) in clinically documented infections and 1.7 (4.2) in non-infectious fever (P = not significant). Five days after the antibiotic therapy was started, fever persisted in 29 neutropenic episodes (32%). Cases that were eventually diagnosed with invasive aspergillosis had PCT values significantly higher [10.1 ng/ml (6.7)] than all remaining groups (P = 0.027; Kruskal-Wallis). Our analysis indicates that the PCT level on first day of fever did not facilitate the differential diagnosis of neutropenic febrile episode. However, when fever persisted for more than 5 d, PCT values > or = 3 ng/ml had a high sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis.     

肿瘤患者粒细胞缺乏症并感染的经验性抗生素治疗回顾性分析

目的　总结肿瘤患者粒细胞缺乏症并感染的经验性抗生素治疗的临床经验。方法　回顾性分析 119例肿瘤患者 2 4 8例次的临床资料 ,观察头孢哌酮 (CFP)、氧哌嗪青霉素 (PPC)、头孢他定 (CTZ)、亚胺培南 (IMP)与丁胺卡那霉素 (AMK)分别组成BA、PA、CA、TA方案的疗效及副作用。结果　BA、PA、CA、TA方案分别治疗 10 3、87、35和 2 3例次 ,治疗的中位时间为 7～ 8d ,有效率分别为 6 3%、4 8%、6 8%和 74 % ,PA方案明显为低 (P <0 0 5 )。治疗无效者调整治疗 :改用CA或TA方案加减去甲万古霉素 (NVC)及抗真菌治疗 ;总有效率分别为 88%、83%、86 %和 91%。最常见副作用为胃肠功能紊乱 ,腹泻为 12 % ,皮疹和肝转氨酶轻度升高分别为 4 % ;2例NVC和AMK治疗者出现明显的听力下降和肾脏毒性。结论　BA、CA、TA方案具有相似的疗效 ,可作为一线经验性治疗方案。经验性治疗无效者 ,应改用具有更高抗菌活性的方案或尽早采用NCV和 (或 )抗霉菌治疗     

The efficacy and safety of piperacillin-tazobactam for febrile neutropenic patients in Japan

The IDSA guideline for management of febrile neutropenic patients updated in 2010 recommends monotherapy with anti-pseudomonal-lactam agents, including piperacillin-tazobactam (PIPC/TAZ) for high-risk patients. However, clinical studies of PIPC/TAZ are limited in Japanese patients. In this study, we conducted an open-labeled non-randomized prospective trial to examine the efficacy and safety of PIPC/TAZ as an empirical treatment for Japanese patients with febrile neutropenia. Forty-nine febrile episodes in neutropenic patients excluding those undergoing allogeneic stem cell transplantation (high risk 36, low risk 13) were analyzed. The overall response rate was 71%, and no significant differences between the high-risk and the low-risk group were observed (high risk 72%, low risk 69%). Neither PS nor usage of G-CSF affected the response rate. No major side effects were observed in the study. The efficacy and the safety profile of PIPC/TAZ treatment were comparable to those in other previous Western studies. In conclusion, this study suggests PIPC/TAZ is effective and well tolerated as an initial empirical treatment for febrile neutropenic Japanese patients.     

Meropenem monotherapy versus combination therapy with ceftazidime and amikacin for empirical treatment of febrile neutropenic patients

 Infections remain the major cause of morbidity and mortality among neutropenic cancer patients. The current study addresses the question whether monotherapy with the new broad-spectrum carbapenem meropenem exhibits efficacy comparable to that of the standard combination therapy with ceftazidime and amikacin for empirical treatment of febrile neutropenic patients. Seventy-one patients with hematological malignancies (55%) or solid tumors (45%), neutropenia <500/μl, and fever <38.5  °C were randomly assigned to either meropenem (1 g every 8 h) or ceftazidime (2 g every 8 h) and amikacin (15 mg/kg/day) intravenously. Meropenem (n=34) and ceftazidime/amikacin (n=37) were equivalent with respect to the clinical response at 72 h (62% versus 68%) (p<0.05) and at the end of unmodified therapy (59% versus 62%). Gram-positive bacteremia responded poorly in the meropenem and ceftazidime/amikacin group (29% versus 25%), whereas all gram-negative bacteremias responded except for one in the meropenem group caused by Pseudomonas aeruginosa. All patients survived to 72 h. One patient in each group died of gram-positive sepsis resistant to study medication. No significant side effects occurred in any regimen. This study suggests that meropenem monotherapy might be as effective as combination therapy with ceftazidime and amikacin for the empirical treatment of febrile neutropenic patients. Received: 13 June 1997 / Accepted in revised form: 5 December 1997     

Beta-lactam-resistant Enterobacter bacteremia in febrile neutropenic patients receiving monotherapy

Bacteremia with resistant Enterobacter species has been reported in febrile, neutropenic cancer patients receiving beta-lactam antibiotics. To assess the relationship between enterobacter bacteremia and ceftazidime monotherapy, medical records were reviewed and isolates were tested from 16 neutropenic and 35 nonneutropenic patients with Enterobacter bacteremia. Fifteen isolates from the neutropenic patients were resistant to extended spectrum cephalosporins; only 12 of 35 isolates from the nonneutropenic patients were resistant to Enterobacter species. The neutropenic patients also had more beta-lactam therapy, both immediately before bacteremia and in the preceding year, than did nonneutropenic patients. Prior beta-lactam antibiotic exposure may predispose neutropenic patients to develop resistant Enterobacter bacteremia.     

Ceftriaxone vs. azlocillin and netilmicin in the treatment of febrile neutropenic children

Efficacy of the cephalosporin, ceftriaxone, was compared with that of the combination of the aminoglycoside, netilmicin, and the penicillin, azlocillin, in the treatment of febrile episodes in immunocompromised neutropenic children undergoing chemotherapy for neoplastic disease. During 100 separate febrile episodes, 40 strains of bacteria were isolated from the blood of 34 patients and a further 55 strains from other sites. Nine strains (four of which were staphylococci) to both netilmicin and azlocillin. There was no difference in clinical response between the two therapeutic regimens as assessed 4 and 7 days after treatment began. Ceftriaxone had the considerable practical advantages of once daily dosage without a need for blood monitoring. Ceftriaxone would appear to be effective as initial monotherapy in the treatment of bacterial infections in severely neutropenic children.     

Ceftazidime versus ceftazidime plus tobramycin in febrile neutropenic children

Summary Although the effectiveness of antibiotic monotherapy in febrile neutropenic patients remains unproven, ceftazidime has been shown previously to be effective monotherapy for the empiric treatment of selective patients. The efficacy and safety of ceftazidime versus ceftazidime plus tobramycin was evaluated in the treatment of febrile children (range 8 months to 18 years) with neutropenia secondary to cancer chemotherapeutic agents. Of the evaluable 89 patients, 45 received ceftazidime and 44 received ceftazidime plus tobramycin for 5 to 10 days. At the end of therapy, 30 (67%) of the 45 ceftazidime-treated patients were clinically cured compared with 38 (86%) of 44 combination-treated patients. Thirteen (29%) of the patients treated with ceftazidime failed to respond clinically to treatment, versus four (9%) of the patients treated with ceftazidime/tobramycin (p=0.046). This study suggests that ceftazidime as monotherapy in febrile neutropenic children may be inferior to combination therapy for optimal clinical response in these patients.

---

Ceftazidim im Vergleich zu Ceftazidim plus Tobramycin bei neutropenischen Kindern mit Fieber

Zusammenfassung Ceftazidim hat sich in Monotherapie bei ausgewählten Patienten in der empirischen Behandlung von febriler Neutropenie als wirksam erwiesen, dennoch muß die Effizienz einer Antibiotika-Monotherapie bei neutropenischen Patienten mit Fieber nach wie vor als unbewiesen angesehen werden. Bei neutropenischen Kindern im Alter von 8 Monaten bis 18 Jahren, die eine Krebs-Chemotherapie durchmachten, wurde wegen Fieber eine Behandlung mit Ceftazidim allein oder in Kombination mit Tobramycin durchgeführt. Die Wirksamkeit und Sicherheit dieser beiden Therapieformen wurde verglichen. Von den 89 auswertbaren Patienten erhielten 45 Ceftazidim allein und 44 in Kombination mit Tobramycin. Die Behandlungsdauer lag zwischen 5 und 10 Tagen. Am Ende der Behandlung waren 30 der 45 mit Ceftazidim allein behandelten Patienten (67%) geheilt, in der mit Ceftazidim plus Tobramycin behandelten Gruppe 38 von 44 (86%). 13 der mit Ceftazidim behandelten Patienten (29%) sprachen klinisch nicht auf die Therapie an, in der Ceftazidim/Tobramycin-Gruppe waren 4 Therapieversager (9%) festzustellen (p=0,046). Aus dieser Studie läßt sich ableiten, daß Ceftazidim bei Kindern mit Neutropenie und Fieber in Monotherapie nicht in gleichem Ausmaß optimale Therapieergebnisse erzielen kann wie die Kombination Ceftazidim plus Tobramycin.

     

Bacteremia in patients with febrile neutropenia after chemotherapy at a university medical center in Malaysia.

OBJECTIVES: This study was initiated to determine the local profile of blood culture isolates and antibiotic sensitivities in febrile neutropenic patients following chemotherapy, and to establish if any modifications to treatment guidelines are necessary. DESIGN: A total of 116 episodes of febrile neutropenia admitted to the adult hematology ward at a university medical center in Malaysia were studied retrospectively from January 2004 to January 2005. RESULTS: The study showed 43.1% of febrile neutropenic episodes had established bacteremia. Gram-negative bacteria accounted for 60.3% of isolates. Sensitivities of Gram-negative bacteria to the antibiotics recommended in the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) guidelines were 86.1-97.2%. Coagulase-negative staphylococci were the most common Gram-positive organisms isolated (23.3%). The majority of these were methicillin-resistant. CONCLUSIONS: Carbapenem monotherapy, as recommended in the 2002 IDSA guidelines, is effective treatment for the infections most often encountered at our center. Combination therapy with an aminoglycoside should be considered when using ceftazidime, cefepime or piperacillin-tazobactam, particularly in high-risk patients. Vancomycin should be used if a Gram-positive organism is suspected or isolated.     

Penicillin or vancomycin plus ceftazidime in febrile neutropenic patients after stem cell transplantation

The response of gram-positive cocci to third generation cephalosporin therapy in febrile neutropenic patients is not optimal. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of ceftazidime plus penicillin (C + P) and compared it to ceftazidime plus vancomycin (C + V) in febrile neutropenic patients. The study includes 64 patients admitted to the Department of Haematology. Thirty-six patients were treated with C + V and 28 patients with C + P. Control of infection was observed in 78% of the patients in the C + V group and in 57% of the patients in C + P group (p = 0.5). Infection was the cause of the death of 1 patient in each group. We conclude that the combination of C + P has the same activity as the combination of C + V in febrile neutropenic patients. The morbidity and mortality were identical in both groups but cost effectiveness was in favour of the C + P group.     

A prospective, randomized study comparing cefepime and imipenem-cilastatin in the empirical treatment of febrile neutropenia in patients treated for haematological malignancies

A prospective, open label, randomized, multicentre study was conducted, comparing the efficacy and safety of cefepime with that of imipenem-cilastatin for the management of febrile neutropenia in patients with haematological malignancies. Furthermore, the safety of early discontinuation of antibiotic therapy in patients with fever of undetermined origin (FUO) was assessed. A total of 180 patients with 207 febrile episodes were randomized at start of fever (105 episodes for cefepime and 102 episodes for imipenem). The 2 groups were comparable in terms of age, gender, underlying malignancy, prior transplantation, and presence of central venous catheters. All patients were neutropenic at inclusion with median absolute neutrophil count (ANC) 0.1 x 10(9)/l(range 0-1 x 10(9)/l), and ANC < or = 0.1 x 10(9)/l in 77% of included patients. The mean duration of neutropenia, with ANC < 0.5 x 10(9)/l was 6.2 d. Febrile episodes were classified as microbiologically documented infection (47%), FUO (43%), or clinically documented infection (10%). At final evaluation 1-2 weeks after completion of antibiotic therapy, monotherapy success rates were 40% and 51% in the cefepime and imipenem-cilastatin groups respectively (p = 0.33). The 4-week overall mortality rate was 5%. Three (2%) of the cefepime treated patients and 4 (3%) of the imipenem-cilastatin treated patients died as a result of infection. Adverse events directly related to antibiotic treatment were uncommon and did not differ between groups. Early discontinuation of antibiotic therapy in 31 patients with FUO 48 h after defervescence was not associated with an increased rate of fever relapse or mortality compared with a subgroup of 29 patients where therapy was continued.     

Antiviral therapy of hepatitis C in chronic kidney diseases: meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection remains frequent in patients with chronic kidney disease and the detrimental role of HCV on survival is well-established in this population. Several authors have reported on efficacy and safety of antiviral therapy for hepatitis C in this polulation but there is no clear consensus on management. To evaluate efficacy and safety of antiviral therapy for hepatitis C in patients with chronic kidney disease, we performed a systematic review of the published medical literature and completed a meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials. The primary outcome was sustained virological response (as a measure of efficacy); the secondary outcome was drop-out rate (as a measure of tolerability). We used the random effects model of Der Simonian and Laird, with heterogeneity and sensitivity analyses. We identified 13 studies including 539 unique patients; 10 (76.9%) concerned patients on maintenance dialysis. Only prospective, controlled clinical trials were included. Pooling of study results showed a significant increase of viral response in study (patients treated with antiviral therapy) than control patients (patients who did not receive therapy), the pooled odds ratio (OR) of failure to obtain a sustained viral response was 0.081 [95% confidence intervals (CI), 0.029-0.230], P = 0.0001. The pooled OR of drop-out rate was significantly increased in study vs control patients, OR = 0.389 (95% CI, 0.155-0.957), P = 0.04. The studies were heterogeneous with regard to viral response and drop-out rate. In the subset of clinical trials (n = 6) involving only dialysis patients receiving interferon (IFN) monotherapy for chronic HCV, there was a significant difference in the risk of failure to obtain a sustained viral response (study vs control patients), OR = 0.054 (95% CI, 0.019; 0.150), P = 0.0001 (random-effects model). No significant (NS) heterogeneity was found (Q = 14.604, P = 1.0). No difference in the drop-out rate between study and control patients was shown, OR = 0.920 (95% CI, 0.367; 2.311), NS. This result being homogeneous (Q = 3.639, P = 0.388). Our meta-analysis showed that the viral response was greater in patients with chronic kidney disease who received antiviral therapy than controls. No difference in the drop-out rate between study and control patients occurred in the subgroup of dialysis patients on IFN monotherapy. These results support IFN-based therapy for hepatitis C in patients on maintenance dialysis.     

Interferon and ribavirin for patients with chronic hepatitis C who did not respond to previous interferon therapy: a meta-analysis of controlled and uncontrolled trials

The efficacy of interferon (IFN) combined with ribavirin for the treatment of patients with hepatitis C who failed to respond to initial IFN therapy is not well established. The primary goal of this study was to perform a systematic review of the literature evaluating the efficacy of combination therapy in nonresponders. Studies were retrieved from MEDLINE, abstracts of scientific meetings, and review of the bibliographies of retrieved studies. Controlled trials were included in the primary analysis whereas uncontrolled trials and trials reported as abstracts were included for sensitivity analysis. The primary endpoints were biochemical and virologic response. A combined estimate of the odds ratio (OR) for each endpoint was obtained by using the random effects model. The number needed to treat (NNT) was calculated by taking the inverse of the pooled risk difference. Nine controlled trials (789 patients) were identified. Six months after treatment, the overall sustained biochemical and virologic responses to 24 weeks of combination therapy were 15.2% and 13.2% with a common OR of 3.8 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.2-6.7) and 4.9 (95% CI 2.1-11.2) compared with patients treated with IFN monotherapy. The pooled risk difference for the sustained virologic response (SVR) to combination therapy was 7% (95% CI 2-13). The NNT was 14 (95% CI 8-50), suggesting that approximately 14 patients would need to be treated with 6 months of combination therapy for 1 patient to have a SVR. A number of variables were associated with a high response rate in individual studies. Sensitivity analysis of preliminary trials suggest a higher response rate with longer duration of therapy and non-type 1 genotypes.     

Three-step empiric treatment for severely neutropenic patients with fever: Ceftazidime — Vancomycin — Amphotericin B

Summary In a prospective study 50 febrile episodes in severely neutropenic patients (neutrophils <500/mm³) were empirically treated with ceftazidime monotherapy. If no response was seen after 48 h, vancomycin was added. After another 72 h period, patients with persisting fever additionally received amphotericin B. In 29 episodes (58%) patients became afebrile with ceftazidime monotherapy. Another seven patients (14%) responded to the addition of vancomycin and five patients (10%) needed amphotericin B to become afebrile. A success of the study drugs without modification was seen in 40 episodes (80%), success with modification in three episodes (6%) and failure in six episodes (12%). One patient died of myocardial infarction. No other death occurred during the two-week observation period after entering the study. Though there were two gram-negative isolates resistant to ceftazidime, these patients were successfully treated with modification. It is concluded that the response-adapted additive sequence of ceftazidime, vancomycin and amphotericin B is an effective approach towards febrile episodes in severely neutropenic patients.

---

Stufenweise, empirische Behandlung von neutropenischen Patienten mit Fieber: Ceftazidim — Vancomycin — Amphotericin B

Zusammenfassung In einer prospektiven Studie wurden 50 Fieberepisoden bei neutropenischen Patienten (neutrophile Granulozyten <500/mm³) empirisch mit einer Ceftazidim-Monotherapie behandelt. Trat nach 48 Stunden kein Ansprechen ein, wurde die Behandlung mit Vancomycin erweitert. Nach weiteren 72 Stunden wurde bei Patienten, die nicht ansprachen, eine systemische Amphotericin B-Therapie eingeleitet. In 29 Fieberepisoden (58%) entfieberten die Patienten unter Ceftazidim-Monotherapie. Sieben Patienten entfieberten erst nach Zugabe von Vancomycin und fünf Patienten nach Amphotericin B-Gabe. Ein Behandlungserfolg mit den Studienantibiotika ohne weitere Modifikation wurde in 40 Episoden (80%) beobachtet. In drei Episoden zeigte eine Modifikation Erfolg. Therapieresistent waren sechs Episoden (12%). Ein Patient verstarb an einem Myokardinfarkt. Alle anderen Patienten überlebten die zweiwöchige Beobachtungszeit. In zwei Fällen wurden Ceftazidim-resistente gramnegative Keime isoliert. Diese Patienten sprachen auf eine Modifikation der Behandlung an. Die am klinischen Erfolg orientierte additive Sequenz Ceftazidim, Vancomycin und Amphotericin B ermöglicht eine effektive und sichere empirische Behandlung von neutropenischen Patienten mit Fieber.