今日の臨床サポート

発熱性好中球減少

著者: 木村宗芳 虎の門病院 臨床感染症部臨床感染症科

監修: 荒岡秀樹 虎の門病院 臨床感染症部

著者校正/監修レビュー済:2022/02/16
患者向け説明資料

概要・推奨   

  1. 発熱性好中球減少の状態では、感染の事実が確認される前に速やかに広域の抗菌薬の投与を行うことが推奨される(推奨度1)
  1. FNに対する経験的抗菌薬治療においては、従来から緑膿菌を含む広域なスペクトラムを有するものが推奨されており(推奨度1)、さらに近年ではこれらのカバーだけでは無く、緑色連鎖球菌や肺炎球菌といったグラム陽性球菌への活性を併せ持つβラクタム抗菌薬(第4世代セフェム系抗菌薬、ピペラシリン・タゾバクタム、カルバペネム系抗菌薬)を単剤で投与することが推奨される。
  1. 顆粒球コロニー刺激因子(G-CSF)の予防的投与の有用性とそれが予後に与える影響について。
アカウントをお持ちの方はログイン
  1. 閲覧にはご契約が必要となります。閲覧にはご契約が必要となります。閲覧にはご契約が必要となります。閲覧にはご契約が必要となります。閲覧に
  1. 閲覧にはご契約が必要となります。閲覧にはご契約が必要となります。閲覧にはご契約が必要となります。閲覧には
  1. 閲覧にはご契約が必要となります。閲覧 にはご契約が必要となります。閲覧にはご契約が必要となります。閲覧にはご契約が必要となります。閲覧にはご契約が必要となります。閲覧には
  1. 閲覧にはご契約が必要となります。閲覧にはご契約が必要となります。閲覧にはご契
  1. 閲覧にはご契約が必要となります。閲覧にはご契約が必要となります。閲覧にはご契約が必要となります。閲覧にはご
薬剤監修について:
オーダー内の薬剤用量は日本医科大学付属病院 薬剤部 部長 伊勢雄也 以下、林太祐、渡邉裕次、井ノ口岳洋、梅田将光による疑義照会のプロセスを実施、疑義照会の対象については著者の方による再確認を実施しております。
※薬剤中分類、用法、同効薬、診療報酬は、エルゼビアが独自に作成した薬剤情報であり、 著者により作成された情報ではありません。
尚、用法は添付文書より、同効薬は、薬剤師監修のもとで作成しております。
※同効薬・小児・妊娠および授乳中の注意事項等は、海外の情報も掲載しており、日本の医療事情に適応しない場合があります。
※薬剤情報の(適外/適内/⽤量内/⽤量外/㊜)等の表記は、エルゼビアジャパン編集部によって記載日時にレセプトチェックソフトなどで確認し作成しております。ただし、これらの記載は、実際の保険適応の査定において保険適応及び保険適応外と判断されることを保証するものではありません。また、検査薬、輸液、血液製剤、全身麻酔薬、抗癌剤等の薬剤は保険適応の記載の一部を割愛させていただいています。
(詳細はこちらを参照)
著者のCOI(Conflicts of Interest)開示:
木村宗芳 : 未申告[2022年]
監修:荒岡秀樹 : 未申告[2022年]

改訂のポイント:
  1. FN(発熱性好中球減少症)における抗MRSA薬の適応項目の記載を充実させた。
  1. FNの際に投与が推奨される抗菌薬の理由についての記載を充実させた。
  1. FNの体温の定義が、腋窩体温を測定する日本と深部体温を測定する海外とで異なる点について明記した。
  1. 専門医への相談のタイミングの項目を充実させ、診断的手技が必要なFNや、治癒のために外科処置が必要となりうる病態(肛門周囲膿瘍やNeutropenic Enterocolitis)についての記載を追記した。

病態・疫学・診察

疾患情報(疫学・病態)  
  1. 抗癌薬治療中の患者の、重要な副作用の1つとして骨髄抑制がある。それにより、白血球・赤血球・血小板の減少が起こり得る。
  1. 骨髄抑制による好中球減少時に生じた発熱の状況を、総称して「発熱性好中球減少症(febrile neutropenia、FN)」と呼ぶ。
  1. FNの定義は、絶対好中球数(absolute neutrophil count、ANC)が500/mm3未満、もしくは1,000/mm3未満で今後48時間以内に500/mm3未満になることが予測される状況下で、深部体温38.3℃以上の発熱あるいは1時間以上継続する38℃以上の発熱が生じている状況、である。我が国の多くの医療機関が行なっているように腋窩体温を用いる場合は37.5度以上の発熱を認める場合として定義されていることに注意する。
  1. 抗癌薬の副作用による死亡原因のなかで、FNによるものが第1位である。経験的抗菌薬療法が確立する以前には、その死亡率は75%にも達していた。
  1. 速やかな対応が求められる、内科的emergencyの病態であり、ASCOのガイドラインでは発熱から治療開始まで60分以内となることを推奨している。治療の基本は、リスクに応じた経験的抗菌薬療法の開始である。また、高齢者やステロイド投与中であれば発熱を認めないこともあるため、臨床的に感染症を疑えば迷わず治療を開始することが求められる。
  1. 使用するレジメンや患者の状態によっては、G-CSFの予防投与、抗菌薬の予防投与も検討する。
問診・診察のポイント  
  1. 先行した抗癌薬化学療法からの経過日数をチェックする。一般的には、抗癌薬投与後10~14日で好中球は最小となる。

これより先の閲覧には個人契約のトライアルまたはお申込みが必要です。

最新のエビデンスに基づいた二次文献データベース「今日の臨床サポート」。
常時アップデートされており、最新のエビデンスを各分野のエキスパートが豊富な図表や処方・検査例を交えて分かりやすく解説。日常臨床で遭遇するほぼ全ての症状・疾患から薬剤・検査情報まで瞬時に検索可能です。

まずは15日間無料トライアル
本サイトの知的財産権は全てエルゼビアまたはコンテンツのライセンサーに帰属します。私的利用及び別途規定されている場合を除き、本サイトの利用はいかなる許諾を与えるものでもありません。 本サイト、そのコンテンツ、製品およびサービスのご利用は、お客様ご自身の責任において行ってください。本サイトの利用に基づくいかなる損害についても、エルゼビアは一切の責任及び賠償義務を負いません。 また、本サイトの利用を以て、本サイト利用者は、本サイトの利用に基づき第三者に生じるいかなる損害についても、エルゼビアを免責することに合意したことになります。  本サイトを利用される医学・医療提供者は、独自の臨床的判断を行使するべきです。本サイト利用者の判断においてリスクを正当なものとして受け入れる用意がない限り、コンテンツにおいて提案されている検査または処置がなされるべきではありません。 医学の急速な進歩に鑑み、エルゼビアは、本サイト利用者が診断方法および投与量について、独自に検証を行うことを推奨いたします。

文献 

Alison G Freifeld, Eric J Bow, Kent A Sepkowitz, Michael J Boeckh, James I Ito, Craig A Mullen, Issam I Raad, Kenneth V Rolston, Jo-Anne H Young, John R Wingard, Infectious Diseases Society of America
Clinical practice guideline for the use of antimicrobial agents in neutropenic patients with cancer: 2010 update by the infectious diseases society of america.
Clin Infect Dis. 2011 Feb 15;52(4):e56-93. doi: 10.1093/cid/cir073.
Abstract/Text This document updates and expands the initial Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) Fever and Neutropenia Guideline that was published in 1997 and first updated in 2002. It is intended as a guide for the use of antimicrobial agents in managing patients with cancer who experience chemotherapy-induced fever and neutropenia. Recent advances in antimicrobial drug development and technology, clinical trial results, and extensive clinical experience have informed the approaches and recommendations herein. Because the previous iteration of this guideline in 2002, we have a developed a clearer definition of which populations of patients with cancer may benefit most from antibiotic, antifungal, and antiviral prophylaxis. Furthermore, categorizing neutropenic patients as being at high risk or low risk for infection according to presenting signs and symptoms, underlying cancer, type of therapy, and medical comorbidities has become essential to the treatment algorithm. Risk stratification is a recommended starting point for managing patients with fever and neutropenia. In addition, earlier detection of invasive fungal infections has led to debate regarding optimal use of empirical or preemptive antifungal therapy, although algorithms are still evolving. What has not changed is the indication for immediate empirical antibiotic therapy. It remains true that all patients who present with fever and neutropenia should be treated swiftly and broadly with antibiotics to treat both gram-positive and gram-negative pathogens. Finally, we note that all Panel members are from institutions in the United States or Canada; thus, these guidelines were developed in the context of North American practices. Some recommendations may not be as applicable outside of North America, in areas where differences in available antibiotics, in the predominant pathogens, and/or in health care-associated economic conditions exist. Regardless of venue, clinical vigilance and immediate treatment are the universal keys to managing neutropenic patients with fever and/or infection.

PMID 21258094
C Cattaneo, G Quaresmini, S Casari, M A Capucci, M Micheletti, E Borlenghi, L Signorini, A Re, G Carosi, G Rossi
Recent changes in bacterial epidemiology and the emergence of fluoroquinolone-resistant Escherichia coli among patients with haematological malignancies: results of a prospective study on 823 patients at a single institution.
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2008 Mar;61(3):721-8. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkm514. Epub 2008 Jan 24.
Abstract/Text BACKGROUND: Regular monitoring of bacterial epidemiology allows evaluation of antibacterial strategies adopted. The aim of this study was to disclose evolving trends in the epidemiology of infections and emerging antibiotic resistance in unselected inpatients with haematological cancers.
METHODS: Febrile/infectious episodes occurring in 823 patients consecutively admitted to a single institution during a 16 month period were analysed. Levofloxacin prophylaxis was used in patients with >7 days expected neutropenia.
RESULTS: Fever developed in 364 patients (44.2%) and an infection was documented in 187 (22.7%), either clinically (6.1%) or microbiologically (16.6%). Levofloxacin prophylaxis, used in 39.4% of cases, caused a reduction in febrile episodes only among neutropenic patients and no difference in the frequency of documented infections. Among 164 pathogens isolated, gram-negative (49.4%) outweighed gram-positive bacteria (40.9%), Escherichia coli being most frequent (23.2%). Fluoroquinolone resistance and methicillin resistance were the most frequent types of antibiotic resistance, occurring in 56.1% of bacterial isolates and in 66.7% of staphylococci, respectively. Fluoroquinolone-resistant E. coli accounted for 20.1% of all isolates and for 86.8% of E. coli. Multivariate analysis of risk factors for fluoroquinolone resistance identified prophylaxis (P < 0.001) and neutropenia >7 days (P = 0.02) as independent. Methicillin resistance was independently associated with prophylaxis (P = 0.041) and central venous catheters (P = 0.036). Infections by fluoroquinolone-resistant strains did not show a worse outcome.
CONCLUSIONS: A shift towards gram-negative bacteria has been occurring in recent years in the bacterial epidemiology of haematological patients. Fluoroquinolone resistance is emerging as a major type of antibacterial resistance, particularly among E. coli strains. Further investigation is needed to explore the consequences of such epidemiological changes.

PMID 18218645
A L Oliveira, M de Souza, V M H Carvalho-Dias, M A Ruiz, L Silla, P Yurie Tanaka, B P Simões, P Trabasso, A Seber, C J Lotfi, M A Zanichelli, V R Araujo, C Godoy, A Maiolino, P Urakawa, C A Cunha, C A de Souza, R Pasquini, M Nucci
Epidemiology of bacteremia and factors associated with multi-drug-resistant gram-negative bacteremia in hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients.
Bone Marrow Transplant. 2007 Jun;39(12):775-81. doi: 10.1038/sj.bmt.1705677. Epub 2007 Apr 16.
Abstract/Text The incidence of Gram-negative bacteremia has increased in hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) recipients. We prospectively collected data from 13 Brazilian HSCT centers to characterize the epidemiology of bacteremia occurring early post transplant, and to identify factors associated with infection due to multi-drug-resistant (MDR) Gram-negative isolates. MDR was defined as an isolate with resistance to at least two of the following: third- or fourth-generation cephalosporins, carbapenems or piperacillin-tazobactam. Among 411 HSCT, fever occurred in 333, and 91 developed bacteremia (118 isolates): 47% owing to Gram-positive, 37% owing to Gram-negative, and 16% caused by Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria. Pseudomonas aeruginosa (22%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (19%) and Escherichia coli (17%) accounted for the majority of Gram-negative isolates, and 37% were MDR. These isolates were recovered from 20 patients, representing 5% of all 411 HSCT and 22% of the episodes with bacteremia. By multivariate analysis, treatment with third-generation cephalosporins (odds ratio (OR) 10.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.75-30.27) and being at one of the hospitals (OR 9.47, 95% CI 2.60-34.40) were associated with infection due to MDR Gram-negative isolates. These findings may have important clinical implications in the decision of giving prophylaxis and selecting the empiric antibiotic regimen.

PMID 17438585
Abstract/Text A prospective, randomized trial comparing monotherapy with high-dose ciprofloxacin versus a standard combination regimen of azlocillin and netilmicin in the empirical treatment of febrile episodes in neutropenic patients was performed. One hundred and forty-six patient episodes were randomized, but ten (seven ciprofloxacin and three azlocillin/netilmicin) were considered unevaluable for efficacy, and three episodes were withdrawn due to incorrect randomization or non-neutropenia. Of the remaining 133 episodes, infections resolved without modification of therapy in 25/66 (38%) versus 28/67 (42%) of ciprofloxacin and azlocillin/netilmicin treated groups respectively (P = 0.72). Considering all randomized episodes, therapy was modified in 46/73 (63%) episodes with ciprofloxacin and 39/70 (56%) with azlocillin/netilmicin (P = 0.40). Of 73 patient episodes randomized to ciprofloxacin, 25 (34%) received oral follow-on therapy after a median of three days of intravenous therapy. Infections were microbiologically documented in 31/73 (42%) ciprofloxacin and 32/70 (46%) azlocillin/netilmicin, of which 8/27 (30%) and 14/31 (45%) of evaluable episodes resolved without modification of therapy respectively (P = 0.28). Gram-positive organisms accounted for 78% of all organisms cultured with 36% coagulase-negative staphylococci. Bacteriological eradication was recorded in 18/24 (75%) and 26/29 (90%) evaluable patient episodes treated with ciprofloxacin and azlocillin/netilmicin respectively (P = 0.27). Superinfections were seen in 14% of episodes in both groups, and subsequent infections in 12% ciprofloxacin and 14% azlocillin/netilmicin treated patients. Two patients (one ciprofloxacin and one azlocillin/netilmicin) died within 48 h of randomization, and a further 13 patients (four ciprofloxacin and nine azlocillin/netilmicin) died before resolution of neutropenia. Adverse events were recorded in 9% and 15% of ciprofloxacin and azlocillin/netilmicin treated patients respectively, with skin rash (five ciprofloxacin and four azlocillin/netilmicin), nephrotoxicity (two azlocillin/netilmicin), abnormal liver function tests (two azlocillin/netilmicin), ototoxicity (one azlocillin/netilmicin) and nausea (one ciprofloxacin) being the major events recorded. It was concluded that monotherapy with ciprofloxacin at this dosage is a safe alternative to combination therapy with azlocillin/netilmicin, and has the advantages of twice daily administration, iv and oral presentations, no cross allergy in beta-lactam-hypersensitive patients, and no nephro- or oto-toxicity.

PMID 1399929
Patrick G Morris, Tidi Hassan, Mairead McNamara, Astrid Hassan, Rebecca Wiig, Liam Grogan, Oscar S Breathnach, Edmond Smyth, Hilary Humphreys
Emergence of MRSA in positive blood cultures from patients with febrile neutropenia--a cause for concern.
Support Care Cancer. 2008 Sep;16(9):1085-8. doi: 10.1007/s00520-007-0398-5. Epub 2008 Feb 15.
Abstract/Text GOALS OF WORK: Febrile neutropenia (FN) causes considerable morbidity in patients on cytotoxic chemotherapy. Recently, there has been a trend towards fewer Gram-negative and more Gram-positive infections with increasing antibiotic resistance. To assess these patterns, data from a supra-regional cancer centre in Ireland were reviewed.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: A 5-year review of all positive blood cultures in patients undergoing anti-cancer chemotherapy was carried out.
MAIN RESULTS: Eight hundred and ninety-four patients were reviewed. The mean incidence of FN was 64.2 cases per year. Eight hundred and forty-six blood culture specimens were taken and 173 (20.4%) were culture positive. The isolated organisms were Gram positive (71.1%), Gram negative (27.8%) and fungal (1.1%). Of the Gram-positive organisms, 75.6% were staphylococci. Of these, 67.8% were coagulase-negative staphylococci and 30.1% were Staphylococci aureus. Amongst the S. aureus, 89.3% were methicillin-resistant (MRSA). Vancomycin-resistant enterococci were not identified as a cause of positive blood cultures.
CONCLUSIONS: Amongst patients with cancer who develop FN in our hospital, Gram-positive bacteria account for the largest proportion. The high proportion of MRSA as a cause of positive blood cultures is of concern.

PMID 18274787
David M Weinstock, Mary Conlon, Christine Iovino, Tanya Aubrey, Carlota Gudiol, Elyn Riedel, James W Young, Timothy E Kiehn, Gianna Zuccotti
Colonization, bloodstream infection, and mortality caused by vancomycin-resistant enterococcus early after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant.
Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2007 May;13(5):615-21. doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2007.01.078. Epub 2007 Mar 23.
Abstract/Text Bloodstream infection caused by vancomycin-resistant enterococcus (VRE) is associated with very high mortality among allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (alloHSCT) recipients. However, it remains unclear whether VRE bloodstream infection directly causes mortality in the early posttransplant period or is simply a marker of poor outcome. To determine the risk factors for VRE bloodstream infection and its effect on outcome, we followed 92 patients screened for stool colonization by VRE upon admission for alloHSCT. Patient records were reviewed to determine outcomes, including mortality and microbiologic failure. Colonization by VRE was extremely common, occurring in 40.2% of patients. VRE bloodstream infection developed in 34.2% of colonized patients by day +35, compared to 1.8% without VRE colonization (P < .01). VRE bloodstream infection was associated with a significant decrement in survival and frequent microbiologic failure, despite treatment with linezolid and/or daptomycin. Five (35.7%) of 14 patients with VRE bloodstream infection had attributable mortality or contributing mortality from the infection. Strain typing by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis identified 9 different VRE strains among the 37 colonized patients and 5 patients with different strains recovered from the stool and the blood. In conclusion, stool screening effectively identified patients at extremely high risk for VRE bloodstream infection. The high mortality of VRE in the early posttransplant period supports the use of empiric antibiotics with activity against VRE during periods of fever and neutropenia in colonized patients.

PMID 17448922
J Carratalà, B Rosón, A Fernández-Sevilla, F Alcaide, F Gudiol
Bacteremic pneumonia in neutropenic patients with cancer: causes, empirical antibiotic therapy, and outcome.
Arch Intern Med. 1998 Apr 27;158(8):868-72. doi: 10.1001/archinte.158.8.868.
Abstract/Text BACKGROUND: Bacteremic pneumonia is a major cause of death among neutropenic patients with cancer.
METHODS: We analyzed the causes, empirical antibiotic therapy, and outcome of 40 consecutive cases of bacteremic pneumonia identified among 408 episodes of bacteremia in adult neutropenic patients with cancer, prospectively documented from 1986 to 1995.
RESULTS: The most frequent causative organisms were Pseudomonas aeruginosa (17 cases), Streptococcus pneumoniae (12 cases), Escherichia coli (5 cases), and Streptococcus mitis (3 cases). Overall, P. aeruginosa and S. pneumoniae caused 72.5% of all episodes of bacteremic pneumonia, compared with 11.4% of bacteremic episodes from other sources (P< .001). Thirty patients received ceftazidime and 10 patients received imipenem as the beta-lactam component of the initial empirical treatment. All strains of P. aeruginosa were susceptible to both agents. Forty-seven percent of streptococcal strains were penicillin resistant and showed a decreased susceptibility to ceftazidime (minimum inhibitory concentration ranged from 1 to 64 microg/mL). Five patients (12.5%) were considered to have received inappropriate empirical antibiotic therapy. Attributable mortality in patients with bacteremic pneumonia was higher than in patients with bacteremia from other sources; 22 (55%) of the 40 patients with bacteremic pneumonia died, whereas 39 (10.6%) of the 368 patients with bacteremia from other sources died (P<.001).
CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that bacteremic pneumonia in neutropenic cancer patients is associated with a poor outcome and that empirical antibiotic therapy for neutropenic patients with pneumonia should include agents active against both P. aeruginosa and cephalosporin-resistant streptococci.

PMID 9570172
Andrew Lee, Stanley Mirrett, L Barth Reller, Melvin P Weinstein
Detection of bloodstream infections in adults: how many blood cultures are needed?
J Clin Microbiol. 2007 Nov;45(11):3546-8. doi: 10.1128/JCM.01555-07. Epub 2007 Sep 19.
Abstract/Text Although several reports have shown that two to three 20-ml blood cultures are adequate for the detection of bacteremia and fungemia in adults, a recent study (F. R. Cockerill et al., Clin. Infect. Dis. 38:1724-1730, 2004) found that two blood cultures detected only 80% of bloodstream infections and that three blood cultures detected 96% of episodes. We reviewed data at two university hospitals to determine whether the recent observations by Cockerill et al. are applicable more widely. We assessed all blood cultures obtained from adult inpatients from 1 January 2004 through 31 December 2005 at Robert Wood Johnson University Hospital and Duke University Medical Center. All instances in which > or =3 blood cultures per patient were obtained during a 24-h period were included. The medical records of patients who met the inclusion criteria were reviewed retrospectively to determine the clinical significance of the positive blood culture (true infection versus contamination). Data were analyzed to determine the cumulative sensitivity of blood cultures obtained sequentially during the 24-h time period. Of 629 unimicrobial episodes with > or =3 blood cultures obtained during the 24-h period, 460 (73.1%) were detected with the first blood culture, 564 (89.7%) were detected with the first two blood cultures, 618 (98.2%) were detected with the first three blood cultures, and 628 (99.8%) were detected with the first four blood cultures. Of 351 unimicrobial episodes with > or =4 blood cultures obtained during the 24-h period, 257 (73.2%) were detected with the first blood culture, 308 (93.9%) were detected with the first two blood cultures, 340 (96.9%) were detected with the first three blood cultures, and 350 (99.7%) were detected with the first four blood cultures. Among unimicrobial episodes, Staphylococcus aureus was more likely to be detected with the first blood culture (approximately 90% detected with the first blood culture). There were 58 polymicrobial episodes in which > or =3 blood cultures were obtained. Forty-seven (81.0%) were detected with the first blood culture, 54 (93.1%) were detected with the first two blood cultures, and 58 (100%) were detected with the first three blood cultures. The results of this study indicate that two blood cultures in a 24-h period will detect approximately 90% of bloodstream infections in adults. To achieve a detection rate of >99%, as many as four blood cultures may be needed. The previously held axiom that virtually all bloodstream infections can be detected with two to three blood cultures may no longer be valid but may also depend on the definition of the "first" blood culture obtained (see Materials and Methods and Discussion in the text).

PMID 17881544
F R Cockerill, J W Wilson, E A Vetter, K M Goodman, C A Torgerson, W S Harmsen, C D Schleck, D M Ilstrup, J A Washington, W R Wilson
Optimal testing parameters for blood cultures.
Clin Infect Dis. 2004 Jun 15;38(12):1724-30. doi: 10.1086/421087. Epub 2004 May 25.
Abstract/Text The effects of volume of blood, number of consecutive cultures, and incubation time on pathogen recovery were evaluated for 37,568 blood cultures tested with the automated BACTEC 9240 instrument (Becton Dickinson Diagnostic Instrument Systems) at a tertiary care center over the period of 12 June 1996 through 12 October 1997. When the results for this study were compared with previous data published for manual broth-based blood culture systems and patient samples obtained in the 1970s and 1980s, the following were found: (1) the percentage increase in pathogen recovery per milliliter of blood is less, (2) more consecutive blood culture sets over a 24-h period are required to detect bloodstream pathogens, and (3) a shorter duration of incubation is required to diagnose bloodstream infections. Guidelines developed in the 1970s and 1980s for processing and culturing blood may require revision.

PMID 15227618
Christopher D Pfeiffer, Jason P Fine, Nasia Safdar
Diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis using a galactomannan assay: a meta-analysis.
Clin Infect Dis. 2006 May 15;42(10):1417-27. doi: 10.1086/503427. Epub 2006 Apr 14.
Abstract/Text BACKGROUND: A double-sandwich enzyme-linked immunosorbent galactomannan assay has been approved for surveillance for invasive aspergillosis in immunocompromised patients. We undertook a meta-analysis to assess the accuracy of a galactomannan assay for diagnosing invasive aspergillosis.
METHODS: Studies of the galactomannan assay that used the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer or similar criteria as a reference standard and provided data to calculate sensitivity and specificity were included. Pooled sensitivity and specificity and summary measures of accuracy, Q* (the upper left-most point on the summary receiver-operating characteristic curve), mean D (a log odds ratio), and Youden index were calculated. Subgroup analyses were performed to explore heterogeneity.
RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies from 1966 to 28 February 2005 were included. Overall, the galactomannan assay had a sensitivity of 0.71 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68-0.74) and specificity of 0.89 (95% CI, 0.88-0.90) for proven cases of invasive aspergillosis. The Youden index, mean D, and Q* were 0.54 (95% CI, 0.41-0.65), 2.74 (95% CI, 21.12-3.36), and 0.80 (95% CI, 0.74-0.86), respectively, indicating moderate accuracy. Subgroup analyses showed that the performance of the test differed by patient population and type of reference standard used. Significant heterogeneity was present.
CONCLUSIONS: The galactomannan assay has moderate accuracy for diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis in immunocompromised patients. The test is more useful in patients who have hematological malignancy or who have undergone hematopoietic cell transplantation than in solid-organ transplant recipients. Further studies with attention to the impact of antifungal therapy, rigorous assessment of false-positive test results, and assessment of the utility of the test under nonsurveillance conditions are needed.

PMID 16619154
Julia Bohlius, Christine Herbst, Marcel Reiser, Guido Schwarzer, Andreas Engert
Granulopoiesis-stimulating factors to prevent adverse effects in the treatment of malignant lymphoma.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008 Oct 8;(4):CD003189. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003189.pub4. Epub 2008 Oct 8.
Abstract/Text BACKGROUND: Granulopoiesis-stimulating factors, such as granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) and granulocyte-macrophage-colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF), are being used to prevent febrile neutropenia and infection in patients undergoing treatment for malignant lymphoma. The question of whether G-CSF and GM-CSF improve dose intensity, tumour response, and overall survival in this patient population has not been answered yet. Since the results from single studies are inconclusive, a systematic review was undertaken.
OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness of G-CSF and GM-CSF in patients with malignant lymphoma with respect to preventing neutropenia, febrile neutropenia and infection; improving quality of life, adherence to treatment protocol, tumour response, freedom from treatment failure (FFTF) and overall survival (OS); and adverse effects.
SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CancerLit, and other relevant literature databases; Internet databases of ongoing trials; and conference proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the American Society of Hematology (1980 - 2007). We included full-text and abstract publications as well as unpublished data.
SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing prophylaxis with G-CSF or GM-CSF versus placebo/no prophylaxis in adult patients with malignant lymphoma undergoing chemotherapy were included for review. Both study arms had to receive identical chemotherapy and supportive care.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trial eligibility and quality assessment, data extraction and analysis were done by two reviewers independently. Authors were contacted to obtain missing data.
MAIN RESULTS: We included 13 eligible randomised controlled trials with 2607 randomised patients. Compared with no prophylaxis, both G-CSF and GM-CSF did not improve overall survival (hazard ratio 0.97; 95% CI 0.87 to 1.09) or FFTF (hazard ratio 1.11; 95% CI 0.91 to 1.35). Prophylaxis significantly reduced the relative risk (RR) for severe neutropenia (RR 0.67; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.60 to 0.73), febrile neutropenia (RR 0.74; 95% CI 0.62 to 0.89) and infection (RR 0.74; 95% CI 0.64 to 0.85). There was no evidence that either G-CSF or GM-CSF reduced the number of patients requiring intravenous antibiotics (RR 0.82; 95%CI 0.57 to 1.18); lowered infection related mortality (RR 0.93; 95% CI 0.51 to 1.71); or improved complete tumour response (RR 1.03; 95% CI 0.95 to 1.10).One study evaluated quality of life parameters and found no differences between the treatment groups.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: G-CSF and GM-CSF, when used as a prophylaxis in patients with malignant lymphoma undergoing conventional chemotherapy, reduce the risk of neutropenia, febrile neutropenia and infection. However, based on the randomised trials currently available, there is no evidence that either G-CSF or GM-CSF provide a significant advantage in terms of complete tumour response, FFTF or OS.

PMID 18843642
Nicole M Kuderer, David C Dale, Jeffrey Crawford, Gary H Lyman
Impact of primary prophylaxis with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor on febrile neutropenia and mortality in adult cancer patients receiving chemotherapy: a systematic review.
J Clin Oncol. 2007 Jul 20;25(21):3158-67. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.08.8823.
Abstract/Text PURPOSE: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSF) have demonstrated a significant reduction in febrile neutropenia (FN) after systemic chemotherapy. Several RCTs have been published recently that investigate the impact of G-CSF on mortality and relative dose-intensity (RDI).
METHODS: A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of all reported RCTs comparing primary prophylactic G-CSF with placebo or untreated controls in adult solid tumor and malignant lymphoma patients was undertaken without language restrictions, using electronic databases, conference proceedings, and hand-searching techniques. Two reviewers extracted data independently. Summary estimates of relative risk (RR) with 95% CIs were estimated based on the method of Mantel-Haenszel and DerSimonian and Laird.
RESULTS: Seventeen RCTs were identified including 3,493 patients. For infection-related mortality, RR reduction with G-CSF compared with controls was 45% (RR = 0.55; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.90; P = .018); for early mortality (all-cause mortality during chemotherapy period), it was 40% (RR = 0.60; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.83; P = .002); and for FN, it was 46% (RR = 0.54; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.67; P < .001). Average RDI was significantly higher in patients who received G-CSF compared with control patients (P < .001). Bone or musculoskeletal pain was reported in 10.4% of controls and 19.6% of G-CSF patients (RR = 4.03; 95% CI, 2.15 to 7.52; P < .001). Significant reductions in FN with G-CSF were observed in studies allowing secondary G-CSF prophylaxis in controls and in the three trials with concurrent prophylactic antibiotics in both treatment arms.
CONCLUSION: Prophylactic G-CSF reduces the risk of FN and early deaths, including infection-related mortality, while increasing RDI and musculoskeletal pain. There are insufficient data to assess the impact of G-CSF on disease-free and overall survival.

PMID 17634496
Yoshimasa Kosaka, Yoshiaki Rai, Norikazu Masuda, Toshimi Takano, Toshiaki Saeki, Seigo Nakamura, Ryutaro Shimazaki, Yoshinori Ito, Yutaka Tokuda, Kazuo Tamura
Phase III placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized trial of pegfilgrastim to reduce the risk of febrile neutropenia in breast cancer patients receiving docetaxel/cyclophosphamide chemotherapy.
Support Care Cancer. 2015 Apr;23(4):1137-43. doi: 10.1007/s00520-014-2597-1. Epub 2015 Jan 10.
Abstract/Text PURPOSE: Pegfilgrastim is a pegylated form of filgrastim, a recombinant protein of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, that is used to reduce the risk of febrile neutropenia (FN). Here, we report the results of a phase III trial of pegfilgrastim in breast cancer patients receiving docetaxel and cyclophosphamide (TC) chemotherapy.
METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial to determine the efficacy of pegfilgrastim in reducing the risk of FN in early-stage breast cancer patients. A total of 351 women (177 in the pegfilgrastim group and 174 in the placebo group) between 20 and 69 years of age with stage I-III invasive breast carcinoma who were to receive TC chemotherapy (docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) and cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks) as either neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy were enrolled; 346 of these patients were treated with either pegfilgrastim (n = 173) or placebo (n = 173).
RESULTS: The incidence of FN was significantly lower in the pegfilgrastim group than in the placebo group (1.2 vs. 68.8 %, respectively; P < 0.001). In addition, patients in the pegfilgrastim group required less hospitalization and antibiotics for FN. Most adverse events were consistent with those expected for breast cancer subjects receiving TC chemotherapy.
CONCLUSIONS: Pegfilgrastim is safe and significantly reduces the incidence of FN in breast cancer patients.

PMID 25576433
Kent A Sepkowitz
Treatment of patients with hematologic neoplasm, fever, and neutropenia.
Clin Infect Dis. 2005 Apr 1;40 Suppl 4:S253-6. doi: 10.1086/427330.
Abstract/Text Choices of empirical antibiotic therapy for patients with febrile neutropenia must be made with very little information about the source and site of infection. The clinician is aided by recognition of the subtle signs and symptoms of infection in immunocompromised patients. National guidelines should be applied according to the microbiological patterns and trends in drug resistance at each institution. Case studies are provided to illustrate these challenges in daily practice.

PMID 15768331
Abstract/Text Combinations of beta-lactams plus aminoglycosides have been standard therapy for suspected infections in granulocytopenic cancer patients, especially those with profound long-lasting granulocytopenia. With the advent of new broad-spectrum bactericidal antibiotics such as extended-spectrum cephalosporins or carbapenems, the need to combine beta-lactams with aminoglycosides became more controversial. The objective of this prospective randomized multicenter study was to compare the efficacy, safety, and tolerance of meropenem monotherapy with those of the combination of ceftazidime plus amikacin for the empirical treatment of fever in granulocytopenic cancer patients. Of 1,034 randomized patients, 958 were assessable in the intent-to-treat analysis for response to antibacterial therapy, including 483 in the meropenem group and 475 in the ceftazidime-plus-amikacin group. The median durations of neutropenia were 16 and 17 days, respectively. A successful outcome was reported in 270 of 483 (56%) patients treated with monotherapy compared with 245 of 475 (52%) patients treated with the combination group (P = 0.20). The success rates in the monotherapy group and the combination group were similar by type of infection (single gram-negative bacteremia, single gram-positive bacteremia, clinically documented infection, and possible infection). The occurrence of further infections assessed in patients for whom the allocated regimen was not modified did not differ between the two groups (12% in both groups). Mortality due to the presenting infection or further infection was relatively low (8 patients treated with the monotherapy compared with 13 patients treated with the combination). A total of 1,027 patients were evaluable for adverse events; the proportion of those who developed adverse effects was similar between the two groups (29% in both groups), and only 19 (4%) patients in the monotherapy group and 31 (6%) in the combination group experienced an adverse event related or probably related to the study drug. Allergic reactions were the only reason for stopping the protocol antibiotic(s) (3 and 5 patients, respectively). This study confirms that monotherapy with meropenem is as effective as the combination of ceftazidime plus amikacin for the empiric treatment of fever in persistently granulocytopenic cancer patients, and both regimens were well tolerated.

PMID 8723449
E J Bow, C Rotstein, G A Noskin, M Laverdiere, A P Schwarer, B H Segal, J F Seymour, J Szer, S Sanche
A randomized, open-label, multicenter comparative study of the efficacy and safety of piperacillin-tazobactam and cefepime for the empirical treatment of febrile neutropenic episodes in patients with hematologic malignancies.
Clin Infect Dis. 2006 Aug 15;43(4):447-59. doi: 10.1086/505393. Epub 2006 Jul 10.
Abstract/Text BACKGROUND: The empirical treatment of febrile, neutropenic patients with cancer requires antibacterial regimens active against both gram-positive and gram-negative pathogens. This study was performed to demonstrate the noninferiority of monotherapy with piperacillin-tazobactam, compared with cefepime.
METHODS: We conducted a randomized-controlled, open-label, multicenter clinical trial among high-risk patients from 34 university-affiliated tertiary care medical centers in the United States, Canada, and Australia who were undergoing treatment for leukemia or hematopoietic stem cell transplantation and were hospitalized for empirical treatment of febrile neutropenic episodes. Patients received piperacillin-tazobactam (4.5 g every 6 h) or cefepime (2 g every 8 h) intravenously. The primary outcome was success (defined by defervescence without treatment modification) at 72 h of treatment, end of treatment, and test of cure in the modified intent-to-treat analysis. Secondary outcomes included time to defervescence, microbiological efficacy, the additional use of glycopeptide antibiotics, emergence of resistant bacteria, and safety.
RESULTS: For 528 subjects (265 received piperacillin-tazobactam and 263 received cefepime), success rates were 57.7% and 48.3%, respectively (P = .04) at the 72-h time point, 39.6% and 31.6% (P = .06) at end of treatment, and 26.8% and 20.5% (P = .11) at the test-of-cure visit. The analyses demonstrated noninferiority for piperacillin-tazobactam at all time points (P< or = .0001). Treatment with piperacillin-tazobactam was independently associated with treatment success in multivariate analysis (odds ratio, 1.65; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-2.64; P = .035). Both regimens were well tolerated.
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the noninferiority and safety of piperacillin-tazobactam monotherapy, compared with cefepime, for the empirical treatment of high-risk febrile neutropenic patients with cancer.

PMID 16838234
E J Bow, R Loewen, M S Cheang, T B Shore, M Rubinger, B Schacter
Cytotoxic therapy-induced D-xylose malabsorption and invasive infection during remission-induction therapy for acute myeloid leukemia in adults.
J Clin Oncol. 1997 Jun;15(6):2254-61.
Abstract/Text PURPOSE: To study the sequential changes in the intestinal absorption of an oral pentose probe, D-xylose, in patients receiving therapy for untreated acute myeloid leukemia (AML), and to correlate these changes to infectious morbidity.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Serial D-xylose absorption studies were conducted in 110 consecutive adult patients admitted to a university-affiliated tertiary care hospital for remission-induction therapy for untreated newly diagnosed AML. Serial serum D-xylose levels were obtained 1 hour after a 5-g oral dose of D-xylose at baseline and weekly for 4 weeks until marrow recovery. These results were correlated with invasive infection using multivariate techniques.
RESULTS: The mean (+/- SEM) serum D-xylose levels were 0.88 +/- 0.03, 0.69 +/- 0.03, 0.58 +/- 0.02, 0.53 +/- 0.02, and 0.73 +/- 0.02 mmol/L at baseline and weeks 1 to 4, respectively (P < .0001, analysis of variance [AN-OVA]). Time to malabsorption varied with induction regimen (P = .007, log-rank test). Bloodstream infections during week 2 correlated with malabsorption (P = .007). Neutropenic enterocolitis correlated independently with induction regimen (P = .009), malabsorption at week 2 (P = .02), and the development of candidemia (P = .005). Hepatosplenic fungal infection correlated with induction regimen (P = .03), malabsorption at week 2 (P = .02), and fever at diagnosis (P = .003). Malabsorption was unrelated to the duration of severe neutropenia and the administration of parenteral nutrition.
CONCLUSION: Serial D-xylose absorption studies in subjects with AML produced a characteristic profile of cytotoxic therapy-related damage to the functional integrity of the intestinal epithelium that was regimen dependent, myelosuppression independent, and predictive for invasive infectious complications. Further study to validate these observations appears warranted.

PMID 9196138
Andrew J Ullmann, Jeffrey H Lipton, David H Vesole, Pranatharthi Chandrasekar, Amelia Langston, Stefano R Tarantolo, Hildegard Greinix, Wellington Morais de Azevedo, Vijay Reddy, Navdeep Boparai, Lisa Pedicone, Hernando Patino, Simon Durrant
Posaconazole or fluconazole for prophylaxis in severe graft-versus-host disease.
N Engl J Med. 2007 Jan 25;356(4):335-47. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa061098.
Abstract/Text BACKGROUND: Invasive fungal infections are an important cause of morbidity and mortality after allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation.
METHODS: In an international, randomized, double-blind trial, we compared oral posaconazole with oral fluconazole for prophylaxis against invasive fungal infections in patients with graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) who were receiving immunosuppressive therapy. The primary end point was the incidence of proven or probable invasive fungal infections from randomization to day 112 of the fixed treatment period of the study.
RESULTS: Of a total of 600 patients, 301 were assigned to posaconazole and 299 to fluconazole. At the end of the fixed 112-day treatment period, posaconazole was found to be as effective as fluconazole in preventing all invasive fungal infections (incidence, 5.3% and 9.0%, respectively; odds ratio, 0.56; 95 percent confidence interval [CI], 0.30 to 1.07; P=0.07) and was superior to fluconazole in preventing proven or probable invasive aspergillosis (2.3% vs. 7.0%; odds ratio, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.75; P=0.006). While patients were receiving study medications (exposure period), in the posaconazole group, as compared with the fluconazole group, there were fewer breakthrough invasive fungal infections (2.4% vs. 7.6%, P=0.004), particularly invasive aspergillosis (1.0% vs. 5.9%, P=0.001). Overall mortality was similar in the two groups, but the number of deaths from invasive fungal infections was lower in the posaconazole group (1%, vs. 4% in the fluconazole group; P=0.046). The incidence of treatment-related adverse events was similar in the two groups (36% in the posaconazole group and 38% in the fluconazole group), and the rates of treatment-related serious adverse events were 13% and 10%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Posaconazole was similar to fluconazole for prophylaxis against fungal infections among patients with GVHD. It was superior in preventing invasive aspergillosis and reducing the rate of deaths related to fungal infections. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00034645 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

Copyright 2007 Massachusetts Medical Society.
PMID 17251530
Y Kanda, R Yamamoto, A Chizuka, T Hamaki, M Suguro, C Arai, T Matsuyama, N Takezako, A Miwa, W Kern, M Kami, H Akiyama, H Hirai, A Togawa
Prophylactic action of oral fluconazole against fungal infection in neutropenic patients. A meta-analysis of 16 randomized, controlled trials.
Cancer. 2000 Oct 1;89(7):1611-25.
Abstract/Text BACKGROUND: Fluconazole is used widely for fungal prophylaxis. Although studies with bone marrow transplantation (BMT) recipients clearly showed the usefulness of oral fluconazole, results of the studies in neutropenic patients other than BMT recipients have been inconsistent. Therefore, the authors performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of fluconazole prophylaxis during chemotherapy-induced neutropenia.
METHODS: The authors identified reports that were not restricted to those in English and not restricted to published trials through MEDLINE, CANCERLIT, or the data base of the Pfizer company. The authors included prospective, randomized studies comparing oral fluconazole with placebo, no treatment, or oral polyenes as prophylaxis for fungal infections in neutropenic patients. Two independent authors extracted data from 16 trials with 3734 patients enrolled. The outcome measures were the development of fungal-related death, systemic and superficial fungal infections, the use of empiric intravenous amphotericin-B, and infections or colonization with fluconazole-resistant fungi. The summarized odds ratios (ORs) were calculated using the Mantel-Haenszel method and the DerSimonian-Laird method.
RESULTS: Prophylactic fluconazole was not effective in reducing fungal-related death or in reducing proven, systemic fungal infections in non-BMT patients (OR, 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.30-2.82 and OR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.47-1.55, respectively). However, fluconazole was very effective in reducing superficial fungal infections (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.24-0.80), even when it was given in lower doses (50-200 mg per day). There was no increase in proven, systemic infection of fluconazole-resistant fungi, although colonization of those fungi increased. When the results were combined in studies in which the incidence of systemic fungal infections was > 15%, fluconazole was effective in reducing such infections (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.15-0.36).
CONCLUSIONS: The current analyses failed to find an effect of fluconazole on both fatal fungal infection and systemic fungal infection in non-BMT patients. Further studies on severely neutropenic patients are warranted because prophylactic fluconazole seemed to be effective when the incidence of systemic fungal infection was expected to be > 15%.

PMID 11013378
Anat Gafter-Gvili, Abigail Fraser, Mical Paul, Leonard Leibovici
Meta-analysis: antibiotic prophylaxis reduces mortality in neutropenic patients.
Ann Intern Med. 2005 Jun 21;142(12 Pt 1):979-95. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-142-12_part_1-200506210-00008.
Abstract/Text BACKGROUND: Bacterial infections are a major cause of illness and death in patients who are neutropenic after chemotherapy treatment for cancer. Trials have shown the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis in decreasing the incidence of bacterial infections but not in reducing mortality rates.
PURPOSE: To evaluate whether antibiotic prophylaxis in neutropenic patients reduces mortality and incidence of infection and to assess related adverse events.
DATA SOURCES: The Cochrane Cancer Network register of trials (2004), The Cochrane Library (Issue 4, 2004), EMBASE (1980-2004), MEDLINE (1966-2004), and references of identified studies.
STUDY SELECTION: Randomized, controlled trials comparing antibiotic prophylaxis with placebo or no intervention or another antibiotic in afebrile neutropenic patients.
DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently appraised the quality of trials and extracted data.
DATA SYNTHESIS: Ninety-five trials performed between 1973 and 2004 met inclusion criteria. Fifty-two trials addressed quinolone prophylaxis. Antibiotic prophylaxis significantly decreased the risk for death when compared with placebo or no treatment (relative risk, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.55 to 0.81]). All prophylactic antibiotics were associated with an increased risk for adverse events (relative risk, 1.69 [CI, 1.14 to 2.50]). Fluoroquinolone prophylaxis reduced the risk for all-cause mortality (relative risk, 0.52 [CI, 0.35 to 0.77]), as well as infection-related mortality, fever, clinically documented infections, and microbiologically documented infections. Fluoroquinolone prophylaxis increased the risk for harboring bacilli resistant to the specific drug after treatment and adverse events, but these results were not statistically significant (relative risks, 1.69 [CI, 0.73 to 3.92]) and 1.30 [CI, 0.61 to 2.76], respectively).
LIMITATIONS: Most trials involved patients with hematologic cancer. Data on all-cause mortality were missing in 10 of 50 trials comparing prophylaxis with no prophylaxis. Effect estimates were larger in trials of unclear methodologic quality compared with trials of adequate methodologic quality.
CONCLUSIONS: Antibiotic prophylaxis for neutropenic patients undergoing cytotoxic therapy reduces mortality. Mortality was substantially reduced when analysis was limited to fluoroquinolones. Antibiotic prophylaxis, preferably with a fluoroquinolone, should be considered for neutropenic patients.

PMID 15968013
Giampaolo Bucaneve, Alessandra Micozzi, Francesco Menichetti, Pietro Martino, M Stella Dionisi, Giovanni Martinelli, Bernardino Allione, Domenico D'Antonio, Maurizio Buelli, A Maria Nosari, Daniela Cilloni, Eliana Zuffa, Renato Cantaffa, Giorgina Specchia, Sergio Amadori, Francesco Fabbiano, Giorgio Lambertenghi Deliliers, Francesco Lauria, Robin Foà, Albano Del Favero, Gruppo Italiano Malattie Ematologiche dell'Adulto (GIMEMA) Infection Program
Levofloxacin to prevent bacterial infection in patients with cancer and neutropenia.
N Engl J Med. 2005 Sep 8;353(10):977-87. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa044097.
Abstract/Text BACKGROUND: The prophylactic use of fluoroquinolones in patients with cancer and neutropenia is controversial and is not a recommended intervention.
METHODS: We randomly assigned 760 consecutive adult patients with cancer in whom chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (<1000 neutrophils per cubic millimeter) was expected to occur for more than seven days to receive either oral levofloxacin (500 mg daily) or placebo from the start of chemotherapy until the resolution of neutropenia. Patients were stratified according to their underlying disease (acute leukemia vs. solid tumor or lymphoma).
RESULTS: An intention-to-treat analysis showed that fever was present for the duration of neutropenia in 65 percent of patients who received levofloxacin prophylaxis, as compared with 85 percent of those receiving placebo (243 of 375 vs. 308 of 363; relative risk, 0.76; absolute difference in risk, -20 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, -26 to -14 percent; P=0.001). The levofloxacin group had a lower rate of microbiologically documented infections (absolute difference in risk, -17 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, -24 to -10 percent; P<0.001), bacteremias (difference in risk, -16 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, -22 to -9 percent; P<0.001), and single-agent gram-negative bacteremias (difference in risk, -7 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, -10 to -2 percent; P<0.01) than did the placebo group. Mortality and tolerability were similar in the two groups. The effects of prophylaxis were also similar between patients with acute leukemia and those with solid tumors or lymphoma.
CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic treatment with levofloxacin is an effective and well-tolerated way of preventing febrile episodes and other relevant infection-related outcomes in patients with cancer and profound and protracted neutropenia. The long-term effect of this intervention on microbial resistance in the community is not known.

Copyright 2005 Massachusetts Medical Society.
PMID 16148283
Anat Gafter-Gvili, Abigail Fraser, Mical Paul, Liat Vidal, Theresa A Lawrie, Marianne D van de Wetering, Leontien C M Kremer, Leonard Leibovici
Antibiotic prophylaxis for bacterial infections in afebrile neutropenic patients following chemotherapy.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Jan 18;1:CD004386. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004386.pub3. Epub 2012 Jan 18.
Abstract/Text BACKGROUND: Bacterial infections are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients who are neutropenic following chemotherapy for malignancy. Trials have shown the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis in reducing the incidence of bacterial infections but not in reducing mortality rates. Our systematic review from 2006 also showed a reduction in mortality.
OBJECTIVES: This updated review aimed to evaluate whether there is still a benefit of reduction in mortality when compared to placebo or no intervention.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cancer Network Register of Trials (2011), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2011), MEDLINE (1966 to March 2011), EMBASE (1980 to March 2011), abstracts of conference proceedings and the references of identified studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs comparing different types of antibiotic prophylaxis with placebo or no intervention, or another antibiotic, to prevent bacterial infections in afebrile neutropenic patients.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently appraised the quality of each trial and extracted data from the included trials. Analyses were performed using RevMan 5.1 software.
MAIN RESULTS: One-hundred and nine trials (involving 13,579 patients) that were conducted between the years 1973 to 2010 met the inclusion criteria. When compared with placebo or no intervention, antibiotic prophylaxis significantly reduced the risk of death from all causes (46 trials, 5635 participants; risk ratio (RR) 0.66, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.79) and the risk of infection-related death (43 trials, 5777 participants; RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.77). The estimated number needed to treat (NNT) to prevent one death was 34 (all-cause mortality) and 48 (infection-related mortality).Prophylaxis also significantly reduced the occurrence of fever (54 trials, 6658 participants; RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.87), clinically documented infection (48 trials, 5758 participants; RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.76), microbiologically documented infection (53 trials, 6383 participants; RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.62) and other indicators of infection.There were no significant differences between quinolone prophylaxis and TMP-SMZ prophylaxis with regard to death from all causes or infection, however, quinolone prophylaxis was associated with fewer side effects leading to discontinuation (seven trials, 850 participants; RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.87) and less resistance to the drugs thereafter (six trials, 366 participants; RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.74).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Antibiotic prophylaxis in afebrile neutropenic patients significantly reduced all-cause mortality. In our review, the most significant reduction in mortality was observed in trials assessing prophylaxis with quinolones. The benefits of antibiotic prophylaxis outweighed the harm such as adverse effects and the development of resistance since all-cause mortality was reduced. As most trials in our review were of patients with haematologic cancer, we strongly recommend antibiotic prophylaxis for these patients, preferably with a quinolone. Prophylaxis may also be considered for patients with solid tumours or lymphoma.

PMID 22258955

ページ上部に戻る

戻る

さらなるご利用にはご登録が必要です。

こちらよりご契約または優待日間無料トライアルお申込みをお願いします。

(※トライアルご登録は1名様につき、一度となります)


ご契約の場合はご招待された方だけのご優待特典があります。

以下の優待コードを入力いただくと、

契約期間が通常12ヵ月のところ、14ヵ月ご利用いただけます。

優待コード: (利用期限:まで)

ご契約はこちらから