Once-Daily Oral Levofloxacin Monotherapy versus Piperacillin/Tazobactam Three Times a Day: A Randomized Controlled Multicenter Trial in Patients with Febrile Neutropenia

Current Sites of Infections and Types of Microorganisms in Patient with Febrile Neutropenia in Hematological Wards – Single Center Study

BACKGROUND: Febrile neutropenia occurs in more than 80% of patients with hematological malignances specially after chemotherapy cycles and an infectious source is identified in approximately 20–30%. Various bacterial, viral, and fungal pathogen contribute to the development of neutropenic fever and without prompt antibiotic therapy mortality rate can be as high as 70%. AIM: The objective of the study was to document the current sites of infection in patients with febrile neutropenia in hematological ward in Baghdad Teaching Hospital, the microorganisms and antibiotic susceptibly in culture positive cases and mortality rate in 1 week and 4 weeks after episode of fever. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred cases of febrile neutropenia were evaluated in Hematological Ward of Baghdad Teaching Hospital from January 2019 to January 2020. Detailed history, physical examination, and laboratory investigations were conducted and statistical analysis of the results was done. RESULTS: One hundred cases of febrile neutropenia, mean age of presentation was 41.56 ± 10.5 years. Acute myeloid leukemia (36%) and acute lymphocytic leukemia (26%) were the most common underlying hematological disorder, followed by Aplastic Anemia, Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma, and Hodgkin Lymphoma. Temperature ranged from 38°C to 39°C with mean temperature of 38.4°C and most of the patient presented with short duration of fever, 57% had absolute neutrophil count below 150 cells/μL with mean duration of neutropenia was 14.01 days. Respiratory tract was the most common site of infection (52%) followed by urinary tract (18%) and in 16% had no obvious focus of infection. Thirty percent of cases were culture Gram-positive and Gram-negative microorganism which were more common 62.9% which were generally sensitive to Aminoglycosides while Gram-positive microorganism constituted 29.6% of isolated bacteria and were generally sensitive to vancomycin. No mortality documented 1 and 4 weeks after fever. CONCLUSION: We concluded that the most frequent sites of infection in patient with febrile neutropenia were respiratory tract followed by urinary tract infection, while 16% had undetermined source of infection. Thirty percent of patients had a positive blood culture with Escherichia coli being the most common infecting microorganism, Gram-negative microorganisms were more common than Gram-positive microorganism and fungal infection constituted about 6% of growth. Significant association was found between the fever and longer duration of neutropenia and the greater severity of neutropenia was observed. No mortality related to febrile neutropenia was documented.

Efficacy of oral levofloxacin monotherapy against low-risk FN in patients with malignant lymphoma who received chemotherapy using the CHOP regimen

The safety and feasibility of oral fluoroquinolone monotherapy in patients with low-risk febrile neutropenia (FN) were demonstrated in recent studies. Levofloxacin (LVFX) is a commonly prescribed antibiotic; however, evidence for its efficacy against FN is limited. Therefore, in this study, we retrospectively investigated the efficacy of LVFX against low-risk FN in patients with malignant lymphoma at our institution. Treatment success was defined as recovery from fever and neutropenia without alteration of the initial regimen. We recruited 29 patients between January 2013 and December 2018. The median age of the cohort was 64 (range: 21–87) years; 13 (44.8%) were aged over 65 years. In total, 22 patients had diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Therapy was successful in 24 (82.8%) patients, whereas 5 had treatment failure requiring a change from LVFX to intravenous broad-spectrum antibacterial agents. No deaths related to FN were observed. Two patients required FN-related chemotherapy dose reduction in subsequent cycles. Although this cohort comprised many elderly patients, our study confirmed the efficacy of LVFX in patients with low-risk FN. This may improve the treatment of low-risk FN and malignant lymphoma.

Optimal Management of Neutropenic Fever in Patients With Cancer

Febrile neutropenia remains an important complication of treatment with cytotoxic chemotherapy. It is often the first and sometimes the only sign or symptom of infection in this vulnerable patient population. Urgent and appropriate evaluation and treatment are imperative because delay in initiating appropriate antibiotic therapy may be life threatening. Selection of antibiotics should be based on the patient's symptoms, previous culture data, and institutional antibiograms. Ongoing therapy should be guided by culture and clinical data. Antimicrobial resistance is of great concern, particularly in this population, so careful attention to antibiotic selection and duration is needed.

Preventive antibiotics in pediatric patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML)

BACKGROUND

Treatment of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) comes with a significant risk of life-threatening infection during periods of prolonged severe neutropenia. We studied the impact of preventive intravenous (IV) antibiotic administration at onset of absolute neutropenia on the incidence and outcome of life-threatening infections during treatment of childhood AML.

PROCEDURES

This is a retrospective study on pediatric patients (aged 0-18 years) consecutively diagnosed with de novo AML and treated at a single institution from April 2005 through February 2013. Patients were treated on the Children's Oncology Group (COG) AAML0531 protocol or with a modified United Kingdom Medical Research Council (UK MRC) AML 10 regimen. Pertinent data were extracted from hard copy or electronic chart review.

RESULTS

A total of 76 chemotherapy phases were analyzed from 29 patients. In each phase reported, preventive antibiotics were initiated when the daily absolute neutrophil count was <500 cells/mcl, before onset of fever. Seven episodes of bacteremia were documented with predominantly coagulase-negative staphylococci and viridans group streptococci. One infection-related death occurred, attributed to progressive respiratory failure occurring months after documented candidal pneumonia.

CONCLUSIONS

Initiation of preventive antibiotics at the onset of absolute neutropenia was associated with no mortality from bacteremia. This preventive approach appears feasible and safe.

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.

Piperacillin/tazobactam vs. cefoperazone/sulbactam in adult low-risk febrile neutropenia cases

AIM

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of piperacillin/tazobactam (P/T) and cefoperazone/sulbactam (C/S) in the empirical treatment of adult neutropenic fever.

METHODS

Data and outcomes of low-risk adult cases with neutropenic fever and treated with P/T (4.5 g q6h) or C/S (2 g q8h) between 2005 and 2011 June were extracted from our database. Risk evaluation was made according to criteria of Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) and a score of ≥ 21 was considered as low risk. Data were collected prospectively by daily visits and evaluated retrospectively. Primary outcome was - fever defervescence at 72 h in combination with success without modification (referring to episodes where the patient recovered from fever with disappearance of signs of infection without modification to initial empirical treatment). All-cause mortality referred to death resulting from a documented or presumed infection or unidentified reason during the treatment and 30-day follow-up period.

RESULTS

A total of 172 patients (113 cases P/T and 59 cases C/S) fulfilled the study inclusion criteria. Persistent response in P/T arm was 73.5%, whereas it was 64.5% in C/S arm (p > 0.05). Rates of any modification were also similar in both treatment arms. All-cause mortality during the treatment and 30-day follow-up period was not significantly different (P/T: 4/113 vs. C/S: 2/59, p > 0.05). There was no severe adverse effect requiring antibiotic cessation in both cohorts.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, our data suggest that C/S may be a safe alternative to P/T in the empirical treatment of adult low-risk febrile neutropenia cases.

Oral versus intravenous antibiotic treatment for febrile neutropenia in cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Fever occurring in a neutropenic patient remains a common life-threatening complication of cancer chemotherapy. The common practice is to admit the patient to hospital and treat him or her empirically with intravenous broad-spectrum antibiotics. Oral therapy could be an alternative approach for selected patients.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy of oral antibiotics versus intravenous (IV) antibiotic therapy in febrile neutropenic cancer patients.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2013, Issue 1) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (1966 to January week 4, 2013), EMBASE (1980 to 2013 week 4) and LILACS (1982 to 2007). We searched several databases for ongoing trials. We checked the conference proceedings of the Interscience Conference of Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy (ICAAC) (1995 to 2007), and all references of included studies and major reviews were scanned.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing oral antibiotic(s) to intravenous antibiotic(s) for the treatment of neutropenic cancer patients with fever. The comparison between the two could be started initially (initial oral) or following an initial course of intravenous antibiotic treatment (sequential).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and methodological quality and extracted data. Data concerning mortality, treatment failures and adverse events were extracted from the included studies assuming an 'intention-to-treat' basis for the outcome measures whenever possible. Risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated for dichotomous data. Risk of bias assessment was also made in line with methodology of The Cochrane Collaboration.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-two trials (3142 episodes in 2372 patients) were included in the analyses. The mortality rate was similar when comparing oral to intravenous antibiotic treatment (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.68, 9 trials, 1392 patients, median mortality 0, range 0% to 8.8%). Treatment failure rates were also similar (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.06, all trials). No significant heterogeneity was shown for all comparisons but adverse events. The effect was stable in a wide range of patients. Quinolones alone or combined with another antibiotic were used with comparable results. Adverse reactions, mostly gastrointestinal, were more common with oral antibiotics.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on the present data, oral treatment is an acceptable alternative to intravenous antibiotic treatment in febrile neutropenic cancer patients (excluding patients with acute leukaemia) who are haemodynamically stable, without organ failure, and do not have pneumonia, infection of a central line or a severe soft-tissue infection. The wide CI for mortality allows the present use of oral treatment in groups of patients with an expected low risk for mortality, and further research should be aimed at clarifying the definition of low risk patients.

Two cases of bacteremia caused by Leptotrichia trevisanii in patients with febrile neutropenia

We present two cases of bacteremia caused by Leptotrichia trevisanii: a 12-year-old girl with recurrent myeloid leukemia of the mandible and a 66-year-old man with esophageal carcinoma. As this filamentous bacillus showed indefinite Gram staining and the identification based on biochemical enzymatic reactions was not definitive, identification required 16s rRNA analysis. For this organism, drug sensitivity testing showed susceptiblity to each β-lactam antibiotics and clindamycin, but resistance to fluoroquinolone and erythromycin. This filamentous bacillus needs careful identification and appropriate antibiotic treatment.

Oral versus intravenous antibiotics in treatment of paediatric febrile neutropenia

The purpose of this study is to determine whether, in low-risk febrile neutropenic paediatric populations, oral antibiotics are as effective as intravenous antibiotics in obtaining resolution of the febrile neutropenic episode. A comprehensive literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL identified prospective, randomised controlled trials comparing oral antibiotics with intravenous antibiotics in the treatment of febrile neutropenic episodes in low-risk paediatric oncology patients. Outcomes assessed were mortality, rate of treatment failure, length of the febrile neutropenic episode and adverse events. The random effects model was used to calculate risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous data and mean difference with standard deviation for continuous data. Seven trials were included in the overall analysis, which included 934 episodes of febrile neutropenia in 676 patients aged between 9 months and 20 years. The overall treatment failure rates were not significantly different between oral and intravenous antibiotics (RR: 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.78-1.32, P= 0.91). In carefully selected low-risk febrile neutropenic children, empiric treatment with oral antibiotics is a safe and effective alternative to intravenous antibiotics as they lower the cost of treatment as well as psychosocial burden on these children and their families.

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.

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.

Outpatient management of cancer patients with febrile neutropenia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In some centers, outpatient management for cancer patients with low-risk febrile neutropenia (FN) has been implemented into routine clinical practice. Our objective was to evaluate the current level of evidence before supporting widespread adoption of outpatient management for this population.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed randomized controlled trials evaluating efficacy and safety of outpatient management of FN.

RESULTS

From 1448 reviewed articles, 14 studies were included for meta-analysis. (i) Inpatient versus outpatient setting (6 studies) was not significantly associated with treatment failure [risk ratio 0.81; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55-1.19; P = 0.28]. Death occurred in 13 of 742 FN episodes with no difference between the two groups (risk ratio 1.11; 95% CI 0.41-3.05; P = 0.83). (ii) Outpatient oral versus outpatient parenteral antibiotics (8 studies) were similarly efficacious with no association between route of drug administration and treatment failure (risk ratio 0.93; 95% CI 0.65-1.32; P = 0.67). No death occurred in 857 FN episodes.

CONCLUSION

Based on the current literature, outpatient treatment of FN is a safe and efficacious alternative to inpatient management. Variation between studies in terms of time to discharge, choice of antibiotic class, and age of study population may limit the interpretation of the data.

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.

Piperacillin-tazobactam in pediatric cancer patients younger than 25 months: a retrospective multicenter survey

Piperacillin-Tazobactam (Pip-Taz) is an evidence-based empirical treatment of febrile neutropenia in adolescents and adults. No data are available in pediatric cancer patients <25 months of age. In this retrospective, multicenter data survey, the analysis focuses on safety, tolerance, and efficacy. The daily dose administered was 240 mg/kg given in three equally divided doses. Data on 156 Pip-Taz treatment courses in 69 children <25 months from five pediatric cancer treatment centers (2001-2005) were analyzed. The median duration of treatment with Pip-Taz was 5 days (range, 1-23 days; 1-12 Pip-Taz courses per patient). Pip-Taz was started on the first day of fever in 90% of all courses, in 6% in the first 72 h, and in 4% as second- or third-line agent. Forty-five percent of all patients were neutropenic. In all patients, the outcome was favorable independent whether Pip-Taz was given as monotherapy (42 courses; 27%) or in combination. Overall, Pip-Taz was well tolerated and discontinued due to adverse events in only two patients who experienced non-life-threatening allergic reactions (skin rash and wheezing). The results of this study are preliminary due to the methodological limitations of a retrospective survey. Taking this bias into consideration, Pip-Taz appears to be a safe, and feasible alternative in pediatric cancer patients with febrile neutropenia <25 months of age suggesting that the inclusion of children of all age groups in future prospective controlled studies evaluating Pip-Taz is justified.

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

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.

Management of the febrile neutropenic cancer patient: lessons from 40 years of study

Almost forty years ago the relationship between the circulating neutrophil count and the risk of pyogenic infection was established. Since that time, through the vehicle of clinical trials, much has been learnt about the etiologies, risk factors, pathogenesis, and natural history of first and subsequent febrile neutropenic episodes. Refinements to the empirical antibacterial management has reduced infection-related mortality to less than 10 percent. Algorithmic approaches to persistent fever in the setting of severe neutropenia have been developed. Circumstances wherein preventative strategies are most efficacious have been defined. Clinicians have learned that neutropenic patients comprise a heterogeneous population that does not encounter the same risks for infection-related morbidity and mortality. Tailored stratified approaches to management of the febrile neutropenic patient have been developed that are safe and cost-effective.

Manejo del paciente con neutropenia de bajo riesgo y fiebre

For years the classical approach to febrile episodes in patients with chemotherapy-induced neutropenia consisted of hospital admission and intravenous administration of broad-spectrum antibiotics. However, since the end of the 1980s, it has been known that not all episodes of neutropenia carry the same risk of developing complications. These low risk febrile patients with neutropenia, that is, those without a clear focus of infection, without criteria for severe sepsis, and with an expected duration of neutropenia of less than 7-10 days, could benefit from outpatient oral antibiotic therapy or, failing this, from intravenous administration through a perfusion pump in the home. The present study analyzes the current situation of the new treatment modalities that aim to improve patients' quality of life and to optimize healthcare resources and costs.

[Treatment of febrile neutropenia episodes in children, with a piperacillin-tazobactam and netilmicin combination]

OBJECTIVES

The authors had for aim to assess the effectiveness and toxicity of a piperacillin-tazobactam-netilmicin combination, and the possibility of avoiding using glycopeptide, in children with febrile neutropenic episodes induced by chemotherapy.

METHODS

A retrospective study was made, including children treated for a febrile neutropenic episode (absolute neutrophile count < 0.5 x 10(9)/l) by a piperacillin-tazobactam-netilmicin combination. If fever persisted 48 hours after the beginning of antibiotic therapy, a glycopeptide could be added. The responses to the treatment were defined as follows: 1) total success (no fever or documented infection) at 48 hours and at 72 hours following the beginning of treatment; 2) partial success (apyrexia beyond 72 hours without any therapeutic change); 3) failure (persistent infectious signs 48 hours after the introduction of glycopeptide).

RESULTS

Sixty-nine episodes were assessable, corresponding to 41 patients, treated for a solid tumour (29), an acute leukaemia in remission (11), or a metabolic disease (1). The febrile episodes were divided into fever of unknown origin (71%), microbiologically documented fever (12%), and clinically documented fever (17%). No death occurred, no toxicity was reported. With this antibiotic therapy, total success at 72 hours was observed in 72% in case of fever of unknown origin and 45% in case of documented infections. The success rate reached 84% when a glycopeptide was added (30% of the cases).

CONCLUSION

The piperacillin-tazobactam-netilmicin combination is very effective and well tolerated in probabilistic treatment of febrile neutropenia induced by chemotherapy, but does not allow to decreasing the frequency of glycopeptide administration.

Oral versus intravenous antibiotic treatment for febrile neutropenia in cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Fever occurring in a neutropenic patient remains a common life-threatening complication of cancer chemotherapy. The common practice is to admit the patient to hospital and treat empirically with intravenous broad-spectrum antibiotics. Oral therapy could be an alternative approach for selected patients.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy of oral antibiotics versus intravenous (IV) antibiotic therapy in febrile neutropenic cancer patients.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Cancer Network Register of trials (November 2002), the Cochrane Library (issue 2, 2002), MEDLINE (1966 to 2002), EMBASE (January 1980 to 2002) and LILACS (1982 to 2002). We searched several databases for ongoing trials. We checked the conference proceedings of the Interscience Conference of Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy (ICAAC) 1995 to 2002 and all references of included studies and major reviews were scanned.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing oral antibiotic/s to intravenous antibiotic/s for the treatment of neutropenic cancer patients with fever. The comparison between the two could be started initially (initial oral), or following an initial course of intravenous antibiotic treatment (sequential).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed trial eligibility, methodological quality and extracted data. Data concerning mortality, treatment failures and adverse events were extracted from included studies assuming an "intention-to-treat" basis for the outcome measures whenever possible. Relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous data were estimated.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifteen trials (median mortality 0, range 0 to 8.8%) were included in the analyses. The mortality rate was similar comparing oral to intravenous antibiotic treatment (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.62, 7 trials, 1223 patients). Treatment failure rates were also similar (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.05, all trials). No significant heterogeneity was shown for all comparisons but adverse events. This effect was stable in a wide range of patients. Quinolones alone or combined with another antibiotics were used with comparable results. Adverse reactions, mostly gastrointestinal were more common with oral antibiotics.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on the present data, oral treatment is an acceptable alternative to intravenous antibiotic treatment in febrile neutropenic cancer patients (excluding patients with acute leukaemia) who are haemodynamically stable, without organ failure, not having pneumonia, infection of a central line or a severe soft-tissue infection. The wide confidence interval for mortality allows the present use of oral treatment in groups of patients with an expected low risk for mortality, and further research should be aimed at clarifying the definition of low risk patients.