Outpatient therapy for febrile neutropenia: clinical and economic implications

Early discharge after high dose chemotherapy is safe and feasible: a prospective evaluation of 6 years of home care

A single-center, prospective, non-randomized clinical study was performed to examine the safety and feasibility of early discharge in patients undergoing consolidation chemotherapy for acute leukemia, or autologous stem cell transplant for lymphoma or multiple myeloma. Patients were discharged into ambulatory care the day after the last chemotherapy administration and were subsequently seen at the ambulatory care unit three times a week. One hundred and one of 224 patients were ineligible for the program, mostly because of their medical situation, the lack of a caregiver or the travel time to the hospital. The remaining 123 patients were able to spend more than 70% of the time at home. In 44% of cycles they were never readmitted. This study demonstrates the safety, feasibility and benefits of managing carefully selected patients. Patients and their caregivers felt safe and comfortable at home, and the vast majority preferred home care to in-hospital treatment.

Antimicrobial treatment of febrile neutropenia: pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic considerations

Patients with cancer or hematologic diseases are particularly at risk of infection leading to high morbidity, mortality and costs. Extensive data show that optimization of the administration of antimicrobials according to their pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters improves clinical outcome. Evidence is growing that when pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters are used to target not only clinical cure but also eradication, the selection resistance is also contained. This is of particular importance in patients with neutropenia in whom increasing rates of drug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria have been reported, particularly Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Based on experimental and clinical studies, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters are discussed in this review for each antibiotic used in febrile neutropenia in order to help physicians improve dosing and optimization of antimicrobial agents.

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.

A cost analysis of febrile neutropenia management in Australia: ambulatory v. in-hospital treatment

BACKGROUND

Adult febrile neutropenic oncology patients, at low risk of developing medical complications, may be effectively and safely managed in an ambulatory setting, provided they are appropriately selected and adequate supportive facilities and clinical services are available to monitor these patients and respond to any clinical deterioration.

METHODS

A cost analysis was modelled using decision tree analysis, published cost and effectiveness parameters for ambulatory care strategies and data from the State of Victoria's hospital morbidity dataset. Two-way sensitivity analyses and Monte Carlo simulation were performed to evaluate the uncertainty of costs and outcomes associated with ambulatory care.

RESULTS

The modelled cost analysis showed that cost savings for two ambulatory care strategies were ~30% compared to standard hospital care. The weighted average cost saving per episode of 'low-risk' febrile neutropenia using Strategy 1 (outpatient follow-up only) was 35% (range: 7-55%) and that for Strategy 2 (early discharge and outpatient follow-up) was 30% (range: 7-39%). Strategy 2 was more cost-effective than Strategy 1 and was deemed the more clinically favoured approach.

CONCLUSION

This study outlines a cost structure for a safe and comprehensive ambulatory care program comprised of an early discharge pathway with outpatient follow-up, and promotes this as a cost effective approach to managing 'low-risk' febrile neutropenic patients.

Comparison of actual hospital costs versus DRG revenues for in-patient treatment of febrile neutropenia during adjuvant anthracycline plus/minus taxane-based chemotherapy for primary breast cancer

BACKGROUND

In flat-rate reimbursement systems, the hospital's own costs should not exceed its revenues. In a cohort of primary breast cancer (pBC) patients, costs and reimbursement for febrile neutropenia (FN) were compared to verify cost coverage.

METHODS

A prospective, observational study in pBC patients receiving adjuvant anthracycline ± taxane-based chemotherapy calculated the costs per in-patient FN episode. The correlating revenues were retrospectively analyzed from diagnosis-related group (DRG) invoices. The actual costs of the therapies were compared to the individual DRG revenues, and the results are presented from the provider's perspective.

RESULTS

In 50 patients, n = 11 patients were treated for FN as in-patients. The hospital's overall treatment costs were € 18,288, on average (Ø) € 1663 per case (range € 1139-2344); the overall DRG revenues were € 23,593, Ø € 2145 per case (range € 1266-2660). In n = 8 cases, the DRGs were cost covering, and in n = 3 cases, a loss was observed, but overall resulting in a gain of Ø € 482 per case and thus being cost covering for the provider. Inadequate DRG coding (n = 4/11; 36.4%) resulted in a preventable loss of Ø € 1069/case.

CONCLUSIONS

The costs of FN treatment vary substantially and DRG reimbursements do not necessarily reflect the provider's costs. Surprisingly, the in-patient treatment of FN here is overall more than cost covering if adequately coded. The main reasons are asymmetrical costs for this FN low-risk pBC group. These results emphasize the importance of correct medical coding to avoid potential losses.

Febrile neutropenia

This review summarizes the current status and diagnostic-therapeutic challenges in febrile neutropenia. Patients with neutropenia-associated infections have a poor prognosis. A large meta-analysis of trials assessing prophylactic antibiotics has shown significant survival benefits; clinical significance of resistance is unclear. Administering broad-spectrum antibiotics to established febrile neutropenic patients has become selective, vancomycin is withheld unless absolutely necessary, and low-risk patients are identified with biological markers. Such patients are now managed with oral antibiotics at home or even without antibiotics. Protracted prolonged neutropenia is the setting par excellence for invasive fungal infections. Conventional amphotericin B administered to such risk patients reduces the incidence of fungal infections. New antifungal drugs have heightened efficacy and lowered toxicity. Novel antifungal diagnostic tests include imaging, particularly the CT "halo" sign (aspergillosis), and serology (glucan, galactomannan), and provide earlier diagnosis and treatment and better outcomes. Negative tests may indicate withholding antifungal therapy. High intermittent dosing of liposomal amphotericin B seems as safe and as effective as standard dosing regimens, but at half the drug acquisition cost. The use of nonantibiotic agents has offered alternative management strategies. Recombinant interleukin-11 reduces bacteremia, through a cytoprotective mechanism on the gut. rhIL-11 releases C-reactive protein and causes shedding of soluble TNF receptor-1, modulating the immunological milieu and the systemic inflammatory response. Other candidate molecules include RANTES and long-pentraxin 3. Recombinant growth factors reduce febrile episodes, permitting completion of chemotherapy, increase overall survival, and minimize infection mortality.

Outcomes and cost of outpatient or inpatient management of 712 patients with febrile neutropenia

PURPOSE

We retrospectively compared the outcomes and costs of outpatient and inpatient management of low-risk outpatients who presented to an emergency department with febrile neutropenia (FN).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A single episode of FN was randomly chosen from each of 712 consecutive, low-risk solid tumor outpatients who had been treated prospectively on a clinical pathway (1997-2003). Their medical records were reviewed retrospectively for overall success (resolution of all signs and symptoms of infection without modification of antibiotics, major medical complications, or intensive care unit admission) and nine secondary outcomes. Outcomes were assessed by physician investigators who were blinded to management strategy. Outcomes and costs (payer's perspective) in 529 low-risk outpatients were compared with 123 low-risk patients who were psychosocially ineligible for outpatient management (no access to caregiver, telephone, or transportation; residence > 30 minutes from treating center; poor compliance with previous outpatient therapy) using univariate statistical tests.

RESULTS

Overall success was 80% among low-risk outpatients and 79% among low-risk inpatients. Response to initial antibiotics was 81% among outpatients and 80% among inpatients (P = .94); 21% of those initially treated as outpatients subsequently required hospitalization. All patients ultimately responded to antibiotics; there were no deaths. Serious complications were rare (1%) and equally frequent between the groups. The mean cost of therapy among inpatients was double that of outpatients ($15,231 v $7,772; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Outpatient management of low-risk patients with FN is as safe and effective as inpatient management of low-risk patients and is significantly less costly.

Compliance with a critical pathway for the management of febrile neutropenia and impact on clinical outcomes

Febrile neutropenia is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Managing infectious in neutropenic patients remains a dynamic process, making necessary timely and efficient empirical antibiotic therapy. The implementation of critical pathways has been suggested as a strategy to improve clinical effectiveness. This study evaluated the compliance with an institutional critical pathway for the management of febrile neutropenia and the impact on clinical outcomes at Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, Brazil (HCPA). We performed a cohort study that prospectively included patients hospitalized from January 2004 to December 2005 and presented febrile neutropenia (190 episodes). Historical controls were selected from March 2001 to April 2003 (193 episodes) before the critical pathway was introduced. This study showed a low rate of full compliance (21.6%; 95% CI 15.7-27.5) with the critical pathway. In most cases, there was partial compliance (67.9%; 95% CI 61.3-74.5). Despite the moderate adherence observed, we recorded a decrease in in-hospital all-cause mortality in the sample studied after protocol implementation (from 24.4 to 14.4%; P = 0.017) and reduction in the length of use of cephalosporin and quinolones. In conclusion, implementation of a critical pathway seems to be an effective strategy to improve clinical outcomes in patients hospitalized with febrile neutropenia.

Outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy for bone and joint infections: an italian multicenter study

In the early eighties, the advantages of outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT) (reduced costs, no hospitalization trauma in children, no immobilization syndrome in elderly, reduction in nosocomial infections by multiresistant organisms) were identified in the United States, and suitable therapeutic programs were established. Currently, more than 250,000 patients per year are treated according to an OPAT program. In order to understand the different ways of managing OPAT and its results, a National OPAT Registry was set up in 2003 in Italy. Analysis of data concerning osteomyelitis, septic arthritis, prosthetic joint infection and spondylodiskitis, allowed information to be acquired about 239 cases of bone and joint infections, with particular concern to demographics, therapeutic management, clinical response, and possible side effects. Combination therapy was the first-line choice in 66.9% of cases and frequently intravenous antibiotics were combined with oral ones. Teicoplanin (38%) and ceftriaxone (14.7%), whose pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic properties permit once-a-day administration, were the two top antibiotics chosen; fluoroquinolones (ciprofloxacin and levofloxacin) were the most frequently utilized oral drugs. Clinical success, as well as patients' and doctors' satisfaction with the OPAT regimen was high. Side-effects were mild and occurred in 11% of cases. These data confirm that the management of bone and joint infections in an outpatient setting is suitable, effective and safe.