Cefoperazone plus mezlocillin for empiric therapy of febrile cancer patients

Cefoperazone/Sulbactam-Induced Abdominal Wall Hematoma and Upper Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Case Report and Review of the Literature

An 87-year-old woman developed abdominal wall hematoma and upper gastrointestinal bleeding during treatment with cefoperazone/sulbactam for pneumonia. The woman received cefoperazone/sulbactam at 4.5 g twice daily for intravenous infusion. After 7 days, she developed sudden onset of left lower abdominal pain, associated with subcutaneous mass, and vomited a coffee-colored liquid. Investigations revealed a coagulation index abnormality and activated partial thromboplastin time and prothrombin time increased obviously. She was diagnosed with cefoperazone-induced hemorrhage. Cefoperazone/sulbactam was discontinued and the patient received vitamin K1. The blood coagulation function improved and hematoma disappeared after 3 days. A Naranjo assessment score of 6 was obtained, indicating a probable relationship between the patient’s coagulation function disorder and her use of the suspect drug.

Cefoperazone/sulbactam versus cefoperazone plus mezlocillin: empiric therapy for febrile, neutropenic bone marrow transplant patients

We conducted a prospective, randomized trial in 132 patients undergoing bone marrow transplantation comparing cefoperazone in combination with sulbactam (S), N = 66, vs. cefoperazone plus mezlocillin (CM), N = 66, as empiric antibiotic therapy for fever and neutropenia. Overall duration of neutropenia was 3-55 (median, 13) days. Forty-one patients had positive initial cultures (S = 22 and CM = 19). Twelve of these 41 patients responded to initial study antibacterial agent treatment (S = 6 and CM = 6). Twenty-nine of 41 patients were withdrawn from study because of clinical deterioration, continued fever, or persistently positive cultures (S = 16 and CM = 13). Of the 90 patients who had culture-negative fever (S = 44 and CM = 46), 44 subjects responded with or without the addition of amphotericin B (S = 21 and CM = 23). Thirty-seven of 90 patients were withdrawn from study due to continued fever or clinical deterioration (S = 17 and CM = 20). Nine patients were withdrawn as a result of rash or diarrhea (S = 6 and CM = 3). We conclude that in patients undergoing bone marrow transplantation, there was no difference in efficacy between cefoperazone/sulbactam and the combination of cefoperazone plus mezlocillin in the empiric treatment of the febrile neutropenic patient. Since the majority of initial infections were due to gram positive bacteria, consideration should be given to broadening initial empiric antibacterial agent therapy with drugs that possess potent activity against these organisms.

Management of fever in neutropenic patients

Substantial progress has been made in the management of febrile episodes in neutropenic patients, largely by the prompt administration of potent, broad-spectrum antimicrobial agents. During the past several decades, the spectrum of organisms has changed from a predominance of gram-negative pathogens to a predominance of gram-positive pathogens. In recent years, some hospitals have experienced an increase of infections caused by multi-drug-resistant pathogens. Hence, it is no longer possible to rely on standardized regimens, but antimicrobial therapy must be selected based on the predominant pathogens and antimicrobial susceptibility patterns at each institution. It is customary to initiate antifungal therapy empirically in those patients whose fever persists despite broad-spectrum antibacterial therapy. Alternatives now exist to amphotericin B, including lipid formulations of this drug, and fluconazole. It is critically important that each patient be carefully re-assessed before starting antifungal therapy, because there are many other potential causes for persistent fever, including resistant bacteria and viruses. Novel approaches to therapy include outpatient antibiotics, and use of growth factors as adjunctive therapy. There also has been a renewed interest in white blood cell transfusions. Although the prognosis for infection in neutropenic patients has improved greatly, new infectious problems have emerged that limit our successful management of these complications.

In vitro activity of Ro 23-9424, a dual-action antibacterial agent, against bacterial isolates from cancer patients compared with those of other agents

The in vitro activity of Ro 23-9424 against bacterial isolates from patients with cancer was compared with those of fleroxacin, ciprofloxacin, cefoperazone, and ceftazidime. Ro 23-9424 inhibited the majority of the members of the family Enterobacteriaceae and all Aeromonas isolates at a concentration of less than or equal to 1.0 micrograms/ml. It was also active against Acinetobacter spp. and Haemophilus influenzae, including beta-lactamase-producing strains. The MIC for 90% of isolates (MIC90) of Pseudomonas aeruginosa was 16.0 micrograms/ml. All group A and B streptococci were inhibited by less than or equal to 0.25 micrograms/ml, and 90% of group G streptococci and Streptococcus pneumoniae were inhibited by 1.0 micrograms/ml. All methicillin-susceptible strains of Staphylococcus aureus and 60% of methicillin-resistant strains were susceptible to 2.0 micrograms of Ro 23-9424 per ml, whereas the MIC90 for Staphylococcus epidermidis and Staphylococcus hominis isolates was 4.0 micrograms/ml. Staphylococcus haemolyticus and Enterococcus spp. were less susceptible; MIC90s for them were 16.0 and 32.0 micrograms/ml. Ro 23-9424 has a broad antibacterial spectrum and potential utility for therapy of infections in cancer patients.

Aztreonam in the prevention and treatment of infection in neutropenic cancer patients

The treatment of bacterial infections in neutropenic cancer patients presents a serious challenge to physicians. Although gram-positive infections have become more common in recent years, most infections in this population are caused by gram-negative bacilli. No single regimen has been found to be optimal, and most commonly used regimens are associated with significant disadvantages. Extensive investigation is therefore under way to evaluate the potential of several promising newer antimicrobial agents. Aztreonam, for example, is active against most gram-negative pathogenic bacteria and has been evaluated in several clinical trials in neutropenic patients. As the only agent with gram-negative activity or in combination either with aminoglycosides or with other beta-lactam antibiotics, aztreonam proved useful in the treatment of gram-negative infections in this population. Combination with an aminoglycoside, however, was not found to improve efficacy over aztreonam alone. In fact, since aminoglycosides may potentiate ototoxicity and nephrotoxicity, it may be more appropriate to replace the aminoglycoside component of a combination regimen with aztreonam, as indicated by data from a study of aztreonam plus cefoperazone. Aztreonam selectively inhibits the aerobic gram-negative intestinal flora with only minimal disruption of anaerobic flora, and may be useful for infection prevention, but the importance of anaerobic preservation is not clear. It was concluded that aztreonam appears to be a useful agent for the treatment of febrile neutropenic patients, but further study is recommended.

In vitro assessment of sulbactam plus cefoperazone in the treatment of bacteria isolated from cancer patients

Cefoperazone is a broad-spectrum cephalosporin that has been used extensively to treat infections in cancer patients. A recent survey demonstrated only a 6% resistance to this drug among Gram-negative bacteria. The combination of cefoperazone plus sulbactam was studied in vitro against consecutive isolates causing bacteremia in cancer patients as well as those selected for resistance to cefoperazone. Both a fixed ratio of sulbactam/cefoperazone (2:1 w/w) and selected concentrations of sulbactam (2, 4, 8, and 16 micrograms/ml) were studied. Sulbactam was shown to increase the susceptibility of various unselected Gram-negative bacilli; this effect increased with larger concentrations of sulbactam. The addition of sulbactam at optimum concentration levels made 29 of 65 cefoperazone-resistant Gram-negative bacilli susceptible. This effect was seen most markedly for Acinetobacter spp.