Antibiotic prophylaxis in neutropenic patients

Prophylactic antibiotics or G(M)-CSF for the prevention of infections and improvement of survival in cancer patients receiving myelotoxic chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Febrile neutropenia (FN) and other infectious complications are some of the most serious treatment-related toxicities of chemotherapy for cancer, with a mortality rate of 2% to 21%. The two main types of prophylactic regimens are granulocyte (macrophage) colony-stimulating factors (G(M)-CSF) and antibiotics, frequently quinolones or cotrimoxazole. Current guidelines recommend the use of colony-stimulating factors when the risk of febrile neutropenia is above 20%, but they do not mention the use of antibiotics. However, both regimens have been shown to reduce the incidence of infections. Since no systematic review has compared the two regimens, a systematic review was undertaken.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of G(M)-CSF compared to antibiotics in cancer patients receiving myelotoxic chemotherapy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, databases of ongoing trials, and conference proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the American Society of Hematology (1980 to December 2015). We planned to include both full-text and abstract publications. Two review authors independently screened search results.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing prophylaxis with G(M)-CSF versus antibiotics for the prevention of infection in cancer patients of all ages receiving chemotherapy. All study arms had to receive identical chemotherapy regimes and other supportive care. We included full-text, abstracts, and unpublished data if sufficient information on study design, participant characteristics, interventions and outcomes was available. We excluded cross-over trials, quasi-randomised trials and post-hoc retrospective trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the results of the search strategies, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and analysed data according to standard Cochrane methods. We did final interpretation together with an experienced clinician.

MAIN RESULTS

In this updated review, we included no new randomised controlled trials. We included two trials in the review, one with 40 breast cancer patients receiving high-dose chemotherapy and G-CSF compared to antibiotics, a second one evaluating 155 patients with small-cell lung cancer receiving GM-CSF or antibiotics.We judge the overall risk of bias as high in the G-CSF trial, as neither patients nor physicians were blinded and not all included patients were analysed as randomised (7 out of 40 patients). We considered the overall risk of bias in the GM-CSF to be moderate, because of the risk of performance bias (neither patients nor personnel were blinded), but low risk of selection and attrition bias.For the trial comparing G-CSF to antibiotics, all cause mortality was not reported. There was no evidence of a difference for infection-related mortality, with zero events in each arm. Microbiologically or clinically documented infections, severe infections, quality of life, and adverse events were not reported. There was no evidence of a difference in frequency of febrile neutropenia (risk ratio (RR) 1.22; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 2.84). The quality of the evidence for the two reported outcomes, infection-related mortality and frequency of febrile neutropenia, was very low, due to the low number of patients evaluated (high imprecision) and the high risk of bias.There was no evidence of a difference in terms of median survival time in the trial comparing GM-CSF and antibiotics. Two-year survival times were 6% (0 to 12%) in both arms (high imprecision, low quality of evidence). There were four toxic deaths in the GM-CSF arm and three in the antibiotics arm (3.8%), without evidence of a difference (RR 1.32; 95% CI 0.30 to 5.69; P = 0.71; low quality of evidence). There were 28% grade III or IV infections in the GM-CSF arm and 18% in the antibiotics arm, without any evidence of a difference (RR 1.55; 95% CI 0.86 to 2.80; P = 0.15, low quality of evidence). There were 5 episodes out of 360 cycles of grade IV infections in the GM-CSF arm and 3 episodes out of 334 cycles in the cotrimoxazole arm (0.8%), with no evidence of a difference (RR 1.55; 95% CI 0.37 to 6.42; P = 0.55; low quality of evidence). There was no significant difference between the two arms for non-haematological toxicities like diarrhoea, stomatitis, infections, neurologic, respiratory, or cardiac adverse events. Grade III and IV thrombopenia occurred significantly more frequently in the GM-CSF arm (60.8%) compared to the antibiotics arm (28.9%); (RR 2.10; 95% CI 1.41 to 3.12; P = 0.0002; low quality of evidence). Neither infection-related mortality, incidence of febrile neutropenia, nor quality of life were reported in this trial.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

As we only found two small trials with 195 patients altogether, no conclusion for clinical practice is possible. More trials are necessary to assess the benefits and harms of G(M)-CSF compared to antibiotics for infection prevention in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy.

Prophylactic levofloxacin in pediatric neutropenic patients during autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation

BACKGROUND

Using fluoroquinolone prophylaxis in pediatric neutropenic patients is a controversial issue due to the concern about emergence of resistant strains in addition to the lack of pediatric studies. This study was performed to assess the effectiveness of levofloxacin prophylaxis in pediatric patients during autologous stem cell transplantation.

METHODS

This was an observational study of pediatric patients who underwent autologous stem cell transplantation, comparing patients who received levofloxacin prophylaxis to historical controls.

RESULTS

A total of 96 patients were included (46 patients in the control group and 50 patients received levofloxacin). The median duration till onset of first fever was 11 d in the control group as compared to 15 d in patients who received levofloxacin (p ≤ 0.001). The incidence of infectious complications was higher in patients without levofloxacin (4/46) than those with levofloxacin (1/50). The median duration of empirical antibiotic use was 10 d in the levofloxacin group compared with 14 d in the control group (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Levofloxacin prophylaxis delayed first spike of fever, decreased the incidence of septic complications, and shortened the duration of empiric antibiotic use, but its impact on emergence of resistant organisms should be closely monitored.

Role of antimicrobial prophylaxis during treatment of adults with acute leukemia

Patients with acute leukemia (AL) are at high risk for developing bacterial, viral and fungal infections during chemotherapy. Because these infections cause considerable morbidity and mortality, prevention is attractive. In recent decades, several trials have established the benefit of prophylactic antimicrobials in patients with AL. Administration of prophylactic fluoroquinolone, acyclovir and triazole is recommended in neutropenic patients with AL by both the USA and European national guidelines. The potential for antimicrobial resistance as a long-term consequence of prophylaxis, however, is a concern. The recent development of nonculture-based diagnostic tests for invasive fungal infections has made early diagnosis and targeted treatment a promising future strategy as an alternative to mold-active prophylaxis.

Once-daily, oral levofloxacin monotherapy for low-risk neutropenic fever in cancer patients: a pilot study in China

This pilot study assesses the safety and efficacy of once-daily, oral levofloxacin monotherapy in Chinese patients with low-risk febrile neutropenia. In this prospective, single-arm, open-label, multicenter clinical trial, 46 adult Chinese patients with solid tumors and low-risk febrile neutropenia were included. Patients received oral levofloxacin monotherapy (500 mg orally/day) until day 12, followed by 7 days of follow-up (day 19). Body temperature was measured three times per day. On days 2, 3, 5-7, 9, 12, and 19, disease symptoms and vital signs were recorded, adverse drug reactions were assessed, and blood samples were collected to determine the whole-blood cell count and the absolute neutrophil count. Blood cultures and chest radiographs were performed simultaneously until negative results were found. Oral levofloxacin was effective and well tolerated in 97.6% of patients irrespective of the cancer type and cause of fever. Body temperature began to decline in 24.4, 68.3, and 90.2% of patients, respectively, at 12, 24, and 48 h after initiating levofloxacin therapy. On days 5 and 7, 95.1 and 97.6% of the patients had complete defervescence, respectively. The median time for absolute neutrophil count recovery to at least 1500/mm after initiation of treatment was 3 days. Only one patient reported mild diarrhea. This pilot study showed that oral levofloxacin quickly and effectively reduced fever, initiated neutrophil recovery, and was well tolerated in Chinese low-risk febrile neutropenic patients with solid tumors. Further study is needed to compare patient data of levofloxacin with the standard amoxicillin/ciprofloxacin protocol in this population for both safety and efficacy.

Guidance on the management of diarrhoea during cancer chemotherapy

Diarrhoea induced by chemotherapy in cancer patients is common, causes notable morbidity and mortality, and is managed inconsistently. Previous management guidelines were based on poor evidence and neglect physiological causes of chemotherapy-induced diarrhoea. In the absence of level 1 evidence from randomised controlled trials, we developed practical guidance for clinicians based on a literature review by a multidisciplinary team of clinical oncologists, dietitians, gastroenterologists, medical oncologists, nurses, pharmacist, and a surgeon. Education of patients and their carers about the risks associated with, and management of, chemotherapy-induced diarrhoea is the foundation for optimum treatment of toxic effects. Adequate--and, if necessary, repeated--assessment, appropriate use of loperamide, and knowledge of fluid resuscitation requirements of affected patients is the second crucial step. Use of octreotide and seeking specialist advice early for patients who do not respond to treatment will reduce morbidity and mortality. In view of the burden of chemotherapy-induced diarrhoea, appropriate multidisciplinary research to assess meaningful endpoints is urgently required.

Treatment of febrile neutropenia and prophylaxis in hematologic malignancies: a critical review and update

Febrile neutropenia is one of the most serious complications in patients with haematological malignancies and chemotherapy. A prompt identification of infection and empirical antibiotic therapy can prolong survival. This paper reviews the guidelines about febrile neutropenia in the setting of hematologic malignancies, providing an overview of the definition of fever and neutropenia, and categories of risk assessment, management of infections, and prophylaxis.

Infection control issues in patients with haematological malignancies in the era of multidrug-resistant bacteria

Drug-resistant Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria are now increasingly identified as a cause of infections in immunocompromised hosts. Bacteria identified include the multidrug-resistant (MDR) and even pandrug-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, as well as carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae spp. The threat from MDR pathogens has been well-documented in the past decade with warnings about the consequences of inappropriate use of antimicrobial drugs. Resistant bacteria can substantially complicate the treatment of infections in critically ill patients and can have a substantial effect on mortality. Inappropriate antimicrobial treatment can affect morbidity, mortality, and overall health-care costs. Evidence-based data for prevention and control of MDR pathogen infections in haematology are scarce. Although not yet established a bundle of infection control and prevention measures with an anti-infective stewardship programme is an important strategy in infection control, diagnosis, and antibiotic selection with optimum regimens to ensure a successful outcome for patients.

Febrile neutropenia in hematologic malignancies

Febrile neutropenia (FN) can occur at any time during the course of a malignancy, especially hematologic malignancies, from diagnosis to end-stage disease. The majority of FN episodes are typically confined to the period of initial diagnosis and active treatment. Because of suppressed inflammatory responses, fever is often the sole sign of infection. As FN is a true medical emergency, prompt identification of and intervention in FN can prolong survival and improve quality of life. This article reviews FN in the setting of hematologic malignancies, specifically myelodysplastic syndromes and acute leukemias, providing an overview of the definition of fever and neutropenia, diagnostic approach, categories of risk/risk assessment, management in patients at low and high risk, and prophylaxis of infections.

The role of prophylaxis of bacterial infections in children with acute leukemia/non-hodgkin lymphoma

Infections represent a well-known complication of antineoplastic chemotherapy that may cause delay of treatment, with alteration of the antineoplastic program and dose-intensity, or even the death of a patient that could heal from his/her neoplasia. Bacterial infections are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients who are neutropenic following chemotherapy for malignancy. Therefore a program of antibiotic prophylaxis for febrile neutropenia may be considered in the management strategy of cancer patients.

Antibiotic prophylaxis in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of systemic antibiotic prophylaxis in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) recipients.

METHODS

We collected reports from PubMed, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Web of Science, along with references cited therein. We included prospective, randomized studies on systemic antibiotic prophylaxis in HSCT recipients.

RESULTS

Seventeen trials with 1453 autologous and allogeneic HSCT recipients were included. Systemic antibiotic prophylaxis was compared with placebo or no prophylaxis in 10 trials and with non-absorbable antibiotics in two trials. Systemic antibiotics other than fluoroquinolones were evaluated in five of these 12 trials. Four trials evaluated the effect of the addition of antibiotics for gram-positive bacteria to fluoroquinolones. One trial compared two different systemic antibiotic regimens: fluoroquinolones versus trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole. As a result, systemic antibiotic prophylaxis reduced the incidence of febrile episodes (OR 0.16; 95%CI 0.09-0.30), clinically or microbiologically documented infection (OR 0.38; 95%CI 0.22-0.63) and bacteremia (OR 0.31; 95%CI 0.16-0.59) without significantly affecting all-cause mortality or infection-related mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Systemic antibiotic prophylaxis successfully reduced the incidence of infection. However, there was no significant impact on mortality. The clinical benefits of prophylaxis with fluoroquinolones were inconclusive because of the small number of clinical trials evaluated.

Clinical impact of fluoroquinolone-resistant Escherichia coli in the fecal flora of hematological patients with neutropenia and levofloxacin prophylaxis

BACKGROUND

Fluoroquinolone prophylaxis in patients with neutropenia and hematological malignancies is said to be effective on febrile netropenia (FN)-related infection and mortality; however, the emergence of antibiotic resistance has become a concern. Ciprofloxacin and levofloxacin prophylaxis are most commonly recommended. A significant increase in the rate of quinolone-resistant Escherichia coli in fecal flora has been reported following ciprofloxacin prophylaxis. The acquisition of quinolone-resistant E. coli after levofloxacin use has not been evaluated.

METHODS

We prospectively examined the incidence of quinolone-resistant E. coli isolates recovered from stool cultures before and after levofloxacin prophylaxis in patients with neutropenia from August 2011 to May 2013. Some patients received chemotherapy multiple times.

RESULTS

In this trial, 68 patients were registered. Levofloxacin-resistant E. coli isolates were detected from 11 and 13 of all patients before and after the prophylaxis, respectively. However, this was not statistically significant (P = 0.65). Multiple prophylaxis for sequential chemotherapy did not induce additional quinolone resistance among E. coli isolates. Interestingly, quinolone-resistant E. coli, most of which were extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL) producers, were already detected in approximately 20% of all patients before the initiation of prophylaxis. FN-related bacteremia developed in 2 patients, accompanied by a good prognosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Levofloxacin prophylaxis for neutropenia did not result in a significant acquisition of quinolone-resistant E. coli. However, we detected previous colonization of quinolone-resistant E. coli before prophylaxis, which possibly reflects the spread of ESBL. The epidemic spread of resistant E. coli as a local factor may influence strategies toward the use of quinolone prophylaxis.

The intestinal microbiota and susceptibility to infection in immunocompromised patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Many infections of immunocompromised patients originate from the gastrointestinal tract. The pathogenesis of these infections often begins with alteration of the intestinal microbiota. Understanding the microbiota and how it can either cause or prevent infection is vital for the development of more effective prevention and treatment of these infections. This article reviews and discusses recent work providing insight into the intestinal microbiota of these at-risk immunocompromised patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Studies continue to support the premise that commensal bacteria, largely anaerobic, serve to maintain microbial stability and colonization resistance by preventing overgrowth or domination with more pathogenic bacteria, through interactions within the microbial community and with the host. In patients with immune suppression due to high-dose chemotherapy or hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, disruption of the microbiota through antibiotics as well as impairment of host immunity gives rise to perturbations favoring intestinal domination by pathogenic species, leading to increased bacterial translocation and susceptibility to systemic infection.

SUMMARY

An understanding of the intestinal microbiota and the impact of antibiotics will help to guide our treatment of these gut-originating infections.

Ciprofloxacin prophylaxis in high risk neutropenic patients: effects on outcomes, antimicrobial therapy and resistance

BACKGROUND

The use of quinolone prophylaxis in high-risk neutropenic patients is considered standard of care but the development of resistance is a concern. Previous studies have focused mainly on quinolone resistance among patients receiving prophylaxis, with very few data reporting its impact on the hospital microbial epidemiology.

METHODS

We analyzed a cohort of 329 episodes of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in adults, and compared two periods: 2005 (period 1, no prophylaxis, n=110) and 2006-2008 (period 2, ciprofloxacin prophylaxis, n=219). Outcomes analyzed were the frequency of febrile neutropenia, bacteremia, duration of antibiotic therapy and hospitalization, and antimicrobial resistance to ciprofloxacin and extended-spectrum beta-lactamase [ESBL] production. We analyzed resistance rates (by patients-day) in the cohort, as well as in other patients (neutropenic and non-neutropenic, 11,975 patients-day) admitted to the hematology unit in the same period, taking into consideration the general resistance patterns in the hospital.

RESULTS

Quinolone prophylaxis (period 2) resulted in fewer episodes of febrile neutropenia (159/219 [73%] vs. 102/110 [93%], Chi-square 18.09, p = 0.00002), and bacteremia (49/219 [22] vs. 36/110 [33%], Chi-square 4.10, p = 0.04), shorter duration of antibiotic therapy (p = 0.0002) and hospitalization (p = 0.002), but more frequent use of carbapenems (79/219 [36%] vs. 15/110 [14%], Chi-square 18.06, p = 0.0002). In addition, period 2 was associated with higher rates of quinolone resistance (6.77 vs. 3.02 per 1,000 patients-day, p = 0.03). The rate of ESBL-producing enterobacteria in the two periods was slightly higher in patients receiving quinolone prophylaxis (1.27 vs. 0.38 per 1,000 patients-day, p = 0.26) as well as in the hematology unit overall (1.59 vs. 0.53 per 1,000 patients-day, p = 0.08), but remained stable in the whole hospital (0.53 vs. 0.56 per 1,000 patients-day, p = 0.74).

CONCLUSIONS

Ciprofloxacin prophylaxis was beneficial in high risk neutropenic patients, but important modifications in the prescription of carbapenems and on antimicrobial resistance patterns of isolates were observed. The importance of hospital or ward ecology must be taken into account when deciding for quinolone prophylaxis in high-risk neutropenic patients.

Ambulatory consolidation chemotherapy for acute myeloid leukemia with antibacterial prophylaxis is associated with frequent bacteremia and the emergence of fluoroquinolone resistant E. Coli

BACKGROUND

Ambulatory consolidation chemotherapy for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is frequently associated with bloodstream infections but the spectrum of bacterial pathogens in this setting has not been well-described.

METHODS

We evaluated the emergence of bacteremias and their respective antibiotic susceptibility patterns in AML patients receiving ambulatory-based consolidation therapy. Following achievement of complete remission, 207 patients received the first cycle (C1), and 195 the second cycle (C2), of consolidation on an ambulatory basis. Antimicrobial prophylaxis consisted of ciprofloxacin, amoxicillin and fluconazole.

RESULTS

There were significantly more positive blood cultures for E. coli in C2 as compared to C1 (10 vs. 1, p=0.0045); all E. coli strains for which susceptibility testing was performed demonstrated resistance to ciprofloxacin. In patients under age 60 there was a significantly higher rate of Streptococccus spp. bacteremia in C2 vs. C1; despite amoxicillin prophylaxis all Streptococcus isolates in C2 were sensitive to penicillin. Patients with Staphylococcus bacteremia in C1 had significantly higher rates of Staphylococcus bacteremia in C2 (p=0.009, OR=8.6).

CONCLUSIONS

For AML patients undergoing outpatient-based intensive consolidation chemotherapy with antibiotic prophylaxis, the second cycle is associated with higher rates of ciprofloxacin resistant E. coli, penicillin-sensitive Streptococcus bacteremias and recurrent Staphylococcus infections.

Primary prophylaxis of bacterial infections and Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia in patients with hematological malignancies and solid tumors : guidelines of the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) of the German Society of Hematology and Oncology (DGHO)

Bacterial infections are the most common cause for treatment-related mortality in patients with neutropenia after chemotherapy. Here, we discuss the use of antibacterial prophylaxis against bacteria and Pneumocystis pneumonia (PCP) in neutropenic cancer patients and offer guidance towards the choice of drug. A literature search was performed to screen all articles published between September 2000 and January 2012 on antibiotic prophylaxis in neutropenic cancer patients. The authors assembled original reports and meta-analysis from the literature and drew conclusions, which were discussed and approved in a consensus conference of the Infectious Disease Working Party of the German Society of Hematology and Oncology (AGIHO). Antibacterial prophylaxis has led to a reduction of febrile events and infections. A significant reduction of overall mortality could only be shown in a meta-analysis. Fluoroquinolones are preferred for antibacterial and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole for PCP prophylaxis. Due to serious concerns about an increase of resistant pathogens, only patients at high risk of severe infections should be considered for antibiotic prophylaxis. Risk factors of individual patients and local resistance patterns must be taken into account. Risk factors, choice of drug for antibacterial and PCP prophylaxis and concerns regarding the use of prophylactic antibiotics are discussed in the review.

Incidence of hospital-acquired pneumonia, bacteraemia and urinary tract infections in patients with haematological malignancies, 2004-2010: a surveillance-based study

Objective

This study charted incidence trends of hospital-acquired (HA) pneumonia, bacteraemia and urinary tract infections (UTI) in a haematology department.

Methods

Prospective surveillance of hospital-acquired infections (HAI) was undertaken in a 42-bed haematology department of a university hospital. All patients hospitalized ≥48 hours between 1^st January 2004 and 31^st December 2010 were included. Definitions of HAI were based on a standardized protocol. The incidence was the number of events per 1000 patient-days at risk; only the first HAI was counted. Multivariate Poisson regression was fitted to assess temporal trends.

Results

Among 3 355 patients (58 063 patient-days at risk) included, 1 055 (31%) had HAI. The incidence of HA pneumonia, HA bacteraemia and HA UTI was respectively 3.3, 12.0 and 2.9 per 1000 patient-days at risk. HA bacteraemia incidence increased by 11% (95% confidence interval: +6%, +15%, P<0.001) per year, independently of neutropenia, central venous catheterization (CVC) and haematological disease. The incidences of HA pneumonia and HA UTI were stable. The most frequently isolated pathogens were Aspergillus spp. (59.2%) for pneumonia, coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (44.2%) for bacteraemia and enterobacteria (60%) for UTI.

Conclusion

The incidence of bacteraemia increased, indicating that factors other than CVC exposure, including chemotherapy with its impact on the immune system, could explain this trend. Further analytic studies are needed to explore the factors that could explain this trend.

Oral antibiotics for fever in low-risk neutropenic patients with cancer: a double-blind, randomized, multicenter trial comparing single daily moxifloxacin with twice daily ciprofloxacin plus amoxicillin/clavulanic acid combination therapy--EORTC infectious diseases group trial XV

PURPOSE

This double-blind, multicenter trial compared the efficacy and safety of a single daily oral dose of moxifloxacin with oral combination therapy in low-risk febrile neutropenic patients with cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Inclusion criteria were cancer, febrile neutropenia, low risk of complications as predicted by a Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) score > 20, ability to swallow, and ≤ one single intravenous dose of empiric antibiotic therapy before study drug treatment initiation. Early discharge was encouraged when a set of predefined criteria was met. Patients received either moxifloxacin (400 mg once daily) monotherapy or oral ciprofloxacin (750 mg twice daily) plus amoxicillin/clavulanic acid (1,000 mg twice daily). The trial was designed to show equivalence of the two drug regimens in terms of therapy success, defined as defervescence and improvement in clinical status during study drug treatment (< 10% difference).

RESULTS

Among the 333 patients evaluated in an intention-to-treat analysis, therapy success was observed in 80% of the patients administered moxifloxacin and in 82% of the patients administered combination therapy (95% CI for the difference, -10% to 8%, consistent with equivalence). Minor differences in tolerability, safety, and reasons for failure were observed. More than 50% of the patients in the two arms were discharged on protocol therapy, with 5% readmissions among those in either arm. Survival was similar (99%) in both arms.

CONCLUSION

Monotherapy with once daily oral moxifloxacin is efficacious and safe in low-risk febrile neutropenic patients identified with the help of the MASCC scoring system, discharged early, and observed as outpatients.

Antimicrobial prophylaxis and outpatient management of fever and neutropenia in adults treated for malignancy: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline

PURPOSE

To provide guidelines on antimicrobial prophylaxis for adult neutropenic oncology outpatients and on selection and treatment as outpatients of those with fever and neutropenia.

METHODS

A literature search identified relevant studies published in English. Primary outcomes included: development of fever and/or infections in afebrile neutropenic outpatients and recovery without complications and overall mortality in febrile neutropenic outpatients. Secondary outcomes included: in afebrile neutropenic outpatients, infection-related mortality; in outpatients with fever and neutropenia, defervescence without regimen change, time to defervescence, infectious complications, and recurrent fever; and in both groups, hospital admissions, duration, and adverse effects of antimicrobials. An Expert Panel developed guidelines based on extracted data and informal consensus.

RESULTS

Forty-seven articles from 43 studies met selection criteria.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Antibacterial and antifungal prophylaxis are only recommended for patients expected to have < 100 neutrophils/μL for > 7 days, unless other factors increase risks for complications or mortality to similar levels. Inpatient treatment is standard to manage febrile neutropenic episodes, although carefully selected patients may be managed as outpatients after systematic assessment beginning with a validated risk index (eg, Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer [MASCC] score or Talcott's rules). Patients with MASCC scores ≥ 21 or in Talcott group 4, and without other risk factors, can be managed safely as outpatients. Febrile neutropenic patients should receive initial doses of empirical antibacterial therapy within an hour of triage and should either be monitored for at least 4 hours to determine suitability for outpatient management or be admitted to the hospital. An oral fluoroquinolone plus amoxicillin/clavulanate (or plus clindamycin if penicillin allergic) is recommended as empiric therapy, unless fluoroquinolone prophylaxis was used before fever developed.

Evaluation and Management of Bacterial and Fungal Infections Occurring in Patients with a Hematological Malignancy: A 2011 Update

Patients with a hematological malignancy are a heterogeneous patient population who are afflicted with diseases that range from rapidly fatal acute leukemia to indolent lymphoma or chronic leukemia. Treatment options for these patients range from observation to hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), but all patients are more susceptible to infection. The problem of infection is dynamic with continued shifts in pathogenic organisms and microbial susceptibilities, new treatment regimens that further diminish immune function, and patients receiving treatment who are now older and frailer. The classic patterns of immunodeficiency for patients with a hematological malignancy include: periods of profound neutropenia, increased iatrogenic risks (i.e., central vascular catheters), and cellular immune suppression that affects HSCT recipients, patients with lymphoid malignancies, and those receiving treatment with corticosteroids or agents like alemtuzumab [1–4]. Recent advances in antimicrobial drug development, new technology, clinical trial results, and further clinical experience have enhanced the database on which to make infection prophylaxis and treatment decisions. However, the practicing clinician must remember that the majority of basic infection management principles for patients who are neutropenic remain unchanged.

Prevention of bacterial infection in pediatric oncology: what do we know, what can we learn?

Bacterial sepsis continues to be a leading cause of morbidity and toxic death in children receiving intensive therapy for cancer. Empiric therapy for suspected infections and treatment of documented infections are well-established standards of care. The routine use of prophylactic strategies is much less common in pediatric oncology. This paper will review the current literature on the use and risks of antimicrobial prophylaxis as well as non-pharmacological methods for infection prevention and will address areas in need of further research.

How I treat hematologic emergencies in adults with acute leukemia

Acute myeloid leukemia and acute lymphoblastic leukemia remain devastating diseases. Only approximately 40% of younger and 10% of older adults are long-term survivors. Although curing the leukemia is always the most formidable challenge, complications from the disease itself and its treatment are associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Such complications, discussed herein, include tumor lysis, hyperleukocytosis, cytarabine-induced cellebellar toxicity, acute promyelocytic leukemia differentiation syndrome, thrombohemorrhagic syndrome in acute promyelocytic leukemia, L-asparaginase-associated thrombosis, leukemic meningitis, neutropenic fever, neutropenic enterocolitis, and transfussion-associated GVHD. Whereas clinical trials form the backbone for the management of acute leukemia, emergent clinical situations, predictable or not, are common and do not readily lend themselves to clinical trial evaluation. Furthermore, practice guidelines are often lacking. Not only are prospective trials impractical because of the emergent nature of the issue at hand, but clinicians are often reluctant to randomize such patients. Extensive practical experience is crucial and, even if there is no consensus, management of such emergencies should be guided by an understanding of the underlying pathophysiologic mechanisms.

Optimal use of recombinant granulocyte colony-stimulating factor with chemotherapy for solid tumors

Neutropenia is a frequent complication of anticancer chemotherapy (CT) often associated with life-threatening infections, hospitalization, dose reduction and/or delay in the administration of CT. Administration of recombinant granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (rG-CSF) reduces the duration and the degree of CT-neutropenia. rG-CSF that stimulates both neutropoiesis and neutrophil function, has become an integral part of supportive care during cytotoxic CT, to prevent febrile neutropenia (FN), particularly in patients with a risk of FN ≥ 20%. International guidelines have standardized conditions for rG-CSF administration, however, some 'gray zones' still exist around optimal timing and tailoring of this therapy. We report here the results of a research project aimed to extend the consensus on the optimal use of rG-CSF in association with CT in patient with solid tumours. We also propose a recently developed pharmacodynamic model, based on the biological effects of CT and rG -CSF on bone marrow compartments that clearly indicates within the prophylactic rather than therapeutic setting the better way of rG-CSF administration.

Efficacy and safety of moxifloxacin as antibacterial prophylaxis for patients receiving autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a randomised trial

Patients receiving high-dose chemotherapy with autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation (PBSCT) are at high risk of infections, especially bacteraemia. A prospective, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, single-centre, pilot study was performed on oral moxifloxacin 400mg versus placebo for preventing bacteraemia in PBSCT recipients. Patients received moxifloxacin or placebo for the duration of neutropenia or until emergence of fever or other infections necessitating intravenous antibiotic treatment. Of 68 patients included in the trial, 2 were excluded from the trial before taking their first dose. The remaining 66 patients were eligible for evaluation in the intention-to-treat analysis set. Neutropenia with an absolute neutrophil count of <500cells/μL developed in 30 moxifloxacin-treated patients (88.2%) and 21 patients in the placebo group (65.6%) (P<0.03). Nine patients (26.5%) and eight patients (25.0%), respectively, were prematurely discontinued from study treatment. Breakthrough bacteraemia occurred in 3 moxifloxacin-treated patients (8.8%) and 9 patients in the placebo group (28.1%) (P=0.042). The time period until fever was 9.5 days [95% confidence interval (CI) 8.06-10.94 days) and 7.69 days (95% CI 6.51-8.85 days), respectively (P=0.0499). There was no difference in adverse events or toxicities between the groups. Moxifloxacin prevented bacteraemia and shortened febrile episodes in patients receiving autologous PBSCT. No significant increase of adverse events in the moxifloxacin arm was observed, possibly due to the rather small sample size.

A survey on hematology-oncology pediatric AIEOP centers: prophylaxis, empirical therapy and nursing prevention procedures of infectious complications

A nationwide questionnaire-based survey was designed to evaluate the management and prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia in pediatric patients admitted to hematology-oncology and hematopoietic stem cell transplant units. Of the 34 participating centers, 40 and 63%, respectively, continue to prescribe antibacterial and antimycotic prophylaxis in low-risk subjects and 78 and 94% in transplant patients. Approximately half of the centers prescribe a combination antibiotic regimen as first-line therapy in low-risk patients and up to 81% in high-risk patients. When initial empirical therapy fails after seven days, 63% of the centers add empirical antimycotic therapy in low-and 81% in high-risk patients. Overall management varies significantly across centers. Preventive nursing procedures are in accordance with international guidelines. This survey is the first to focus on prescribing practices in children with cancer and could help to implement practice guidelines.

Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in lung cancer patients: the role of antibiotic prophylaxis

Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia can cause fatal bacterial infections. Colony-stimulating factors (CSFs) are usually recommended as prophylaxis, while routine use of prophylactic antibiotics remains controversial. Based on our literature search in PubMed, quinolones and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole were the most frequently used prophylaxis, while CSFs were administered in 22.1% of patients. Lung cancer patients who received prophylactic antibiotics exhibited significantly fewer episodes of febrile neutropenia, fewer documented infections as well as shorter duration of related hospitalisations. Prophylactic use of wide spectrum antibiotics seems effective and should be considered as an alternative strategy in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in lung cancer patients.

Use of antibacterial prophylaxis for patients with neutropenia. Australian Consensus Guidelines 2011 Steering Committee

The use of oral prophylactic antibiotics in patients with neutropenia is controversial and not recommended by this group because of a lack of evidence showing a reduction in mortality and concerns that such practice promotes antimicrobial resistance. Recent evidence has demonstrated non-significant but consistent, improvement in all-cause mortality when fluoroquinolones (FQs) are used as primary prophylaxis. However, the consensus was that this evidence was not strong enough to recommend prophylaxis. The evidence base for FQ prophylaxis is presented alongside current consensus opinion to guide the appropriate and judicious use of these agents. Due consideration is given to patient risk, as it pertains to specific patient populations, as well as the net effect on selective pressure from antibiotics if FQ prophylaxis is routinely used in a target population. The potential costs and consequences of emerging FQ resistance, particularly among Escherichia coli, Clostridium difficile and Gram-positive organisms, are considered. As FQ prophylaxis has been advocated in some chemotherapy protocols, specific regard is given to whether FQ prophylaxis should be used to support these regimens. The group also provides recommendations for monitoring and surveillance of emerging resistance in those centres that have adopted FQ prophylaxis.

Clinical practice guideline for the use of antimicrobial agents in neutropenic patients with cancer: 2010 update by the infectious diseases society of america

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.

Guidelines for the management of bacterial and fungal infections during chemotherapy for pediatric acute leukemia or solid tumors: what is available in 2010?

Febrile episodes and infections represent important complications during antineoplastic chemotherapy for pediatric neoplastic diseases. In the last years many international association published guidelines for the management of these complications in adults, but no document of this type was prepared for children. One of the major causes of this situation is probably the very low number of pediatric clinical trials with adequate power and design. The paper summarizes guidelines provided for the management of infectious complications in adults with cancer by different international and will comment on how much they may be translated in the management of pediatric patients.

Antibacterial prophylaxis in neutropenic children with cancer

During the period of neutropenia induced by chemotherapy, patients have a high risk of infection. The use of antibiotic prophylaxis to reduce neutropenia-related complications in patients with cancer is still disputed. Recent meta-analysis and clinical trials demonstrated that antibiotic prophylaxis with quinolones reduces febrile episodes, bacterial infections and mortality in adult oncological patients with neutropenia induced by chemotherapy in acute leukaemia. In paediatric patients, the only randomized, double-blind, prospective study until now suggests that amoxicillin/clavulanate may represent an effective prophylactic treatment in reducing fever and infections in oncological children with neutropenia, with an efficacy that is statistically demonstrated only in patients with acute leukaemia. Considering the risk of resistances, antibiotic-prophylaxis should be used only in selected patients.

Clinical impact of fluoroquinolone prophylaxis in neutropenic patients with hematological malignancies

BACKGROUND

The routine use of fluoroquinolone prophylaxis in patients with neutropenia and hematological malignancies is controversial. This prophylaxis has been reported to have a positive impact in reducing infection-related mortality, but the consequent development of antibiotic resistance has become a concern. This study assessed the effect of discontinuing quinolone prophylaxis on the etiology and the resistance pattern of blood culture isolates and on the prognosis among febrile neutropenic patients receiving chemotherapy.

METHODS

The results of blood cultures obtained from febrile neutropenic patients between January 2003 and June 2009 were analyzed; these results were available through a computer database set up in 2003.

RESULTS

Patients receiving quinolone prophylaxis between 2003 and 2005 showed a lower incidence of Gram-negative bacteria than patients not receiving prophylaxis between 2006 and 2009 (13.5%, n=9 vs. 48.1%, n=75). Interestingly, after discontinuing prophylaxis, approximately 70% of the Gram-negative bacteria isolated were quinolone-resistant, and some were extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL) producers. The frequencies of quinolone-resistant Gram-positive bacteria isolated were similar between the period of quinolone prophylaxis and the period with no prophylaxis (61.1% vs. 64.3%). In both periods, all Gram-positive isolates were sensitive to vancomycin. The infection-related mortality was comparable between patients receiving prophylaxis and those not receiving prophylaxis (1.5%, n=1 vs. 1.3%, n=2).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that quinolone prophylaxis for neutropenia does not induce a significant increase in the growth of quinolone- and multidrug-resistant bacteria. Rather, discontinuing quinolone prophylaxis may induce a dramatic increase in the growth of Gram-negative bacteria, including ESBL producers. Our results suggest that the necessity for quinolone prophylaxis in neutropenic patients should be determined based on local antibiotic resistance patterns.

Executive Summary: Clinical Practice Guideline for the Use of Antimicrobial Agents in Neutropenic Patients with Cancer: 2010 Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America

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.

Prophylactic and therapeutic strategies in chemotherapy-induced neutropenia

INTRODUCTION

Neutropenia poses a serious threat to patients on chemotherapy. It exposes them to the risk of infection--including potentially fatal infections--and also leads to delays in treatment and reductions in dose intensity, which can compromise the possibility of a favorable outcome.

AREAS COVERED

The use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSF) and antibiotics to prevent febrile neutropenia (FN) and to ameliorate cancer chemotherapy-induced myelosuppression is discussed, based on a systematic search of Pubmed for clinical trials, reviews and meta-analysis published in the last 20 years. We consider that the treatment of FN, with the emphasis on careful attention to the patient, prompts antibiotic therapy and good hospital care.

EXPERT OPINION

We would argue that antibiotic prophylaxis should be offered routinely to patients receiving cytotoxic chemotherapy for acute leukemia and for patients with solid tumors and lymphoma receiving high-dose chemotherapy. In patients undergoing cyclical standard-dose myelosuppressive chemotherapy, we believe that prophylaxis is indicated during the first cycle of chemotherapy in which there is an expectation of grade 4 neutropenia (< 500 neutrophils). However, although the use of antibiotics and haematopoietic growth factors may improve quality of life by reducing the risk and consequences of FN, further study of the magnitude of their effects is needed.

Impact of bloodstream infections on outcome and the influence of prophylactic oral antibiotic regimens in allogeneic hematopoietic SCT recipients

This study aimed to determine the impact of blood stream infections (BSIs) on outcome of allogeneic hematopoietic SCT (HSCT), and to examine the influence of old (non-levofloxacin-containing) and new (levofloxacin-based) prophylactic antibiotic protocols on the pattern of BSIs. We retrospectively enrolled 246 allogeneic HSCT recipients between January 1999 and June 2006, dividing patients into BSI (within 6 months post-HSCT, n=61) and non-BSI groups (n=185). We found that Gram-negative bacteria (GNB) predominated BSI pathogens (54%). Multivariate analyses showed that patients with a BSI, compared with those without, had a significantly greater 6-month mortality (hazard ratio, 1.75; 95% confidence interval, 1.09-2.82; P=0.021) and a significantly increased length of hospital (LOH) stay (70.8 vs 55.2 days, P=0.014). Moreover, recipients of old and new protocols did not have a significantly different 6-month mortality and time-to-occurrence of BSIs. However, there were significantly more resistant GNB to third-generation cephalosporins and carbapenem in recipients of levofloxacin-based prophylaxis. Our data suggest that BSIs occur substantially and impact negatively on the outcome and LOH stay after allogeneic HSCT despite antibiotic prophylaxis. Levofloxacin-based prophylaxis, albeit providing similar efficacy to non-levofloxacin-containing regimens, may be associated with increased antimicrobial resistance.

Antibiotic prophylaxis during chemotherapy-induced neutropenia for patients with acute leukemia

Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia places patients with acute leukemia at high risk for bacterial infections. A number of studies performed over the past 20 years have investigated the utility of prophylactic antimicrobials, including trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole and fluoroquinolones, to prevent infection in the setting of mucositis and neutropenia. Many of these studies have found a benefit of prophylaxis in terms of the incidence of fever and bacterial infection. Clinical guidelines do not recommend antibacterial prophylaxis, however, in part because of increasing reports of infections due to resistant organisms, including fluoroquinolone-resistant Escherichia coli, fluoroquinolone-insensitive viridans streptococci, and Clostridium difficile. To effectively use prophylaxis and simultaneously limit emerging antibiotic resistance, only patients at high risk for bacterial infections should receive prophylaxis.

Decreased incidence of febrile episodes with antibiotic prophylaxis in the treatment of decitabine for myelodysplastic syndrome

We analyzed the role of antibiotic prophylaxis during decitabine treatment for MDS. The primary endpoint was the incidence of febrile episodes. The total number of decitabine cycles given to 28 patients was 131, and febrile episodes occurred in 15 cycles (11.5%). Antibiotic prophylaxis was orally administered in 95 cycles (72.5%). Febrile episodes were significantly less frequent among patients who received antibiotic prophylaxis (7.4%) than in those without prophylaxis (22.2%) (P=0.017). In conclusion, antibiotic prophylaxis reduced the incidence of febrile episodes in patients who received decitabine treatment for MDS, especially at earlier cycles and in the presence of severe cytopenia.

Antibiotic management of febrile neutropenia: current developments and future directions

Mortality due to febrile neutropenia has decreased since the concept of empiric therapy became standard care. However, infectious complications remain the most common adverse events of chemotherapy. bacterial epidemiology has changed during the past decades. There is currently an increasing trend in infections due to Gramnegative bacteria which have higher rates of resistance for a variety of reasons.The use of biomarkers for diagnosis remains a domain of further investigation. Since the patient population with febrile neutropenia is very heterogeneous, models of risk assessment have been developed with the most commonly used today being the mASCC score.Oral antibiotic treatment seems to be appropriate in low-risk patients. In moderate or high-risk patients monotherapy is the most common option. However, due to emerging resistance this could change by next year. Some new antibiotics have been developed, but experience in the treatment of neutropenic fever is limited. The use of antibiotics for prophylaxis remains controversial, although recent studies suggest a reduction in death from all causes.

Controversies in the management of fever in the neutropenic cancer patient

The febrile neutropenic episode (FNE) constitutes a medical emergency, primarily because of the attendant risks of overwhelming infection and death. Infection, particularly bacterial in nature, is the most important cause of FNE, although there are other potential causes that depend on host, disease, and therapy related factors. The spectrum of microbiological pathogens varies both temporally and geographically, rendering it difficult to provide universal recommendations for antimicrobial therapy in FNE. Nonetheless, there are unifying principles in the management of FNE that are helpful in guiding therapeutic decisions. Using a case-based approach in a patient with lymphoma, the following controversies regarding the management of FNE are discussed: the role of prophylactic anti-bacterial antimicrobials, the management of febrile patients in the out-patient setting, and the choice of initial antimicrobials.