INTERVENTIONAL ANTIMICROBIAL THERAPY IN FEBRILE NEUTROPENIC PATIENTS

被引:75
|
作者
LINK, H
MASCHMEYER, G
MEYER, P
HIDDEMANN, W
STILLE, W
HELMERKING, M
ADAM, D
机构
[1] FREE UNIV BERLIN, KLINIKUM RUDOLF VIRCHOW, ROBERT ROSSLE HOSP, DEPT MED ONCOL & APPL MOLEC BIOL, D-13122 BERLIN, GERMANY
[2] UNIV KLIN WURZBURG, MED POLIKLIN, D-97070 WURZBURG, GERMANY
[3] UNIV GOTTINGEN, MED KLIN, DEPT HEMATOL & ONCOL, D-37075 GOTTINGEN, GERMANY
[4] UNIV KLIN FRANKFURT, CTR INTERNAL MED, D-60590 FRANKFURT, GERMANY
[5] PAUL EHRLICH GESELL CHEMOTHERAPY, D-81701 MUNICH, GERMANY
[6] UNIV MUNICH, CHILDRENS HOSP, D-80337 MUNICH, GERMANY
关键词
FEVER; NEUTROPENIA; INFECTION; PNEUMONIA; ANTIMICROBIAL THERAPY; ANTIFUNGALS; RISK FACTORS;
D O I
10.1007/BF01700277
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
In this prospective multicenter trial, treatment strategies for 1573 patients with neutropenia < 1000/mu l and fever greater than or equal to 38.5 degrees C after cytotoxic chemotherapy were compared. Patients with unexplained fever were randomized to a three-phase sequential study for different established drug regimens. If an infection could be defined microbiologically or clinically, treat ment modifications were determined. In phase I, treatment for all patients consisted of acylaminopenicillin (PEN) plus aminoglycoside (AMG); or third-generation cephalosporin (CEPH) plus AMG; or PEN plus CEPH. In 800 patients with unexplained fever the response rates were: PEN/AMG (n = 258): 74.4%, CEPH/AMG (n = 252): 73.4%; PEN/CEPH (n = 290): 70.0%. Total response rate was 72.5%. In phase II, patients not responding after 3 days received PEN/CEPH/vancomycin (n = 70) or PEN/CEPH/AMG (n = 74). The respective response rates were 52.9% and 55.4%, total 54.2%. If fever did not resolve, the patients received either PEN/CEPH (n = 40) or imipenem/cilastatin (n = 59) both in combination with amphotericin-B/5-flucytosin/rifampin. The response rates were 62.5% and 79.7%, respectively (p = 0.07), total 72.7%. No significant dif ferences between the treatment modalities compared were found. Analyzing all three phases together, 91.3% of patients with unexplained fever were cured. The response rate was also analyzed according to patients with gram-positive bacteremia (n = 183), response rate 82.5%; gram-negative organisms (n = 145) 78.6%; fungemia (n = 51) 43.1% (p < 0.001); lung infiltrates (n = 269) 61.3% (p < 0.001); clinically documented infections (n = 198) 84.4%; and clinically and microbiologically documented infections (n = 84) 82.1%. If infections were diagnosed after at least 5 febrile days, more lung infiltrates and fungal infections occurred (p < 0.001). Leukocytes rising above 500/mu during the infection predicted better response rates (p < 0.001): in unexplained fever 97.8% vs 86.5% and lower death rates 1.5% vs 8.5%. In documented infections the response rates were then 89.9% vs 62.3% and the death rates 7.0% vs 20.5%. Therapy of neutropenic fever and infections must be adapted according to risk factors and should include early empiric antifungal therapy. The therapeutic and prophylactic use of hematopoietic growth factors to overcome neutropenia should be evaluated.
引用
收藏
页码:231 / 243
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Reducing delays in administration of antibiotic therapy for febrile neutropenic oncology patients
    Black, Sally
    Ayala, Lisandra
    Steinhauer, Corrin
    McCall, Pamela
    McBride, Portia
    ONCOLOGY NURSING FORUM, 2008, 35 (03) : 503 - 503
  • [32] Clinical analysis of combination therapy for febrile neutropenic patients in childhood cancer
    Kobayashi, Shogo
    Ito, Masaki
    Sano, Hideki
    Mochizuki, Kazuhiro
    Akaihata, Mitsuko
    Waragai, Tomoko
    Hosoya, Mitsuaki
    Kikuta, Atsushi
    PEDIATRICS INTERNATIONAL, 2013, 55 (01) : 65 - 71
  • [33] Risk assessment and risk-based therapy in febrile neutropenic patients
    K. V. I. Rolston
    European Journal of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, 1998, 17 : 461 - 463
  • [34] Preemptive Antifungal Therapy for Febrile Neutropenic Hematological Malignancy Patients in China
    Yuan, Wei
    Ren, Jinhai
    Guo, Xiaonan
    Guo, Xiaoling
    Cai, Shengxin
    MEDICAL SCIENCE MONITOR, 2016, 22 : 4226 - 4232
  • [35] USING TEICOPLANIN FOR EMPIRIC THERAPY OF FEBRILE NEUTROPENIC PATIENTS WITH HEMATOLOGICAL MALIGNANCIES
    MENICHETTI, F
    DELFAVERO, A
    BUCANEVE, G
    AVERSA, F
    FIORIO, M
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF HAEMATOLOGY, 1990, 76 : 45 - 48
  • [36] Empirical therapy of febrile neutropenic patients with mucositis: challenge of risk-based therapy
    Blijlevens, NMA
    Donnelly, JP
    de Pauw, BE
    CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY AND INFECTION, 2001, 7 : 47 - 52
  • [37] Bacteraernia in febrile neutropenic cancer patients
    Klastersky, J.
    Ameye, L.
    Maertens, J.
    Georgala, A.
    Muanza, F.
    Aoun, M.
    Ferrant, A.
    Rapoport, B.
    Rolston, K.
    Paesmans, M.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ANTIMICROBIAL AGENTS, 2007, 30 : S51 - S59
  • [38] TREATMENT OF FEBRILE EPISODES IN NEUTROPENIC PATIENTS
    MELIKIAN, V
    FALK, R
    SCOTTISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1976, 21 (02) : 73 - 74
  • [39] Pharmacokinetics of meropenem in febrile neutropenic patients
    A. Nyhlén
    B. Ljungberg
    I. Nilsson-Ehle
    I. Thuresson
    S. Glans
    S. Rödjer
    R. Lindblad
    M. Polgary
    B. Bäckström
    L. Eliasson
    S. Wennerholm
    European Journal of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, 1997, 16 : 797 - 802
  • [40] Outpatient treatment for febrile neutropenic patients
    Silva, IC
    High, KP
    INFECTIOUS DISEASES IN CLINICAL PRACTICE, 1998, 7 (07) : 307 - 311