Prospective randomized study to compare imipenem 1.5 grams per day vs. 3.0 grams per day in infections of granulocytopenic patients

The objective of this presented prospective randomized study was to compare the efficacy of empirical antimicrobial monotherapy with imipenem 3 x 0.5 g per day to 3 x 1.0 g per day for treatment of infections in neutropenic patients. A total of 192/220 febrile episodes were evaluable for clinical efficacy. The overall response rate was 53/93 (57%) vs. 57/99 (58%). Of the different infection types, fever of unknown origin (FUO) showed the best response, with defervescence in 29/41 (71%) and 36/42 (86%) cases, respectively (not significant). Unfavourable results were found in pneumonias [5/20 (25%) vs. 4/23 (17%)]. The median time until persistent defervescence was equal in both groups (2 days), likewise the median duration of imipenem therapy in responders (7 days). The most frequent micro-organisms were Gram-negative, documented in 22% of the febrile episodes in the lower dosage group vs. 17% of all episodes in the patients with imipenem 3.0 g per day (Gram-positives 17% vs. 14%, fungal 5% vs. 8%). In the lower dosage group, fever with abdominal symptoms occurred less frequently (8% vs. 15%), and significantly more patients tolerated imipenem without any side-effects (95.8% vs. 79.4%), especially regarding severe nausea/vomiting (2.1% vs. 11.8%). Of the initial non-responders, 35/40 (88%) vs. 41/42 (98%) were cured after therapy modification. There was no significant difference in the use of further antibiotics such as aminoglycosides, glycopeptides, ceftazidime or amphotericin B, except a marginally higher use of metronidazole in patients with imipenem 3.0 g per day (3% vs. 10%). Overall, we found no significant differences in efficacy between the two study groups, but more frequent side-effects with imipenem 3.0 g per day.

Dapsone toxicity: some current perspectives

1. Dapsone is a potent anti-inflammatory and anti-parasitic compound, which is metabolised by cytochrome P-450 to hydroxylamines, which in turn cause methaemoglobinaemia and haemolysis. However, during the process of methaemoglobin formation, erythrocytes are capable of detoxifying the hydroxylamine to the parent drug, which may either reach the tissues to exert a therapeutic effect or return to the liver and be re-oxidised in a form of systemic cycling. This glutathione-dependent effect, combined with the un-ionised state of the drug at physiological pH, may contribute to its efficacy. 2. Paradoxically, other aspects of the glutathione-dependent cycling of the hydroxylamine metabolite may contribute to the major adverse reaction of the drug, agranulocytosis. Erythrocytes exposed to the metabolite and repeatedly washed may still release the hydroxylamine in sufficient concentration to kill mononuclear leucocytes in vitro. Thus, erythrocytes may be a conduit for the hydroxylamine to reach the bone marrow to covalently bind to granulocyte precursors, which may trigger an immune response in certain individuals and may lead to the potentially fatal eradication of granulocytes from the circulation. 3. Attempts to increase patient tolerance to dapsone have been most successful using a metabolic inhibitor to reduce hepatic oxidation of the drug to the hydroxylamine. Methaemoglobin formation in the presence of cimetidine was maintained at 30% below control levels for almost 3 mo, and patients' reported side effects such as headache and lethargy were significantly reduced. 4. As clinical application of new and safer dapsone analogues is years away, the use of cimetidine provides an immediate route to increasing patient compliance during dapsone therapy, especially in those maintained on dapsone dosages in excess of 200 mg/day.