Treatment of febrile neutropenic patients with cancer who require hospitalization: a prospective randomized study comparing imipenem and cefepime

Meta-analysis: combination of meropenem vs ceftazidime and amikacin for empirical treatment of cancer patients with febrile neutropenia

BACKGROUND

Meropenem monotherapy vs ceftazidime plus amikacin have been approved for use against febrile neutropenia. To assess the effectiveness and safety of them for empirical treatment of cancer patients with febrile neutropenia, we conducted a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials on ceftazidime plus amikacin, or/and monotherapy with meropenem for the treatment of cancer patients with febrile neutropenia were identified by searching Cochrane Library, PubMed, Science Direct, Wiley Online, Science Citation Index, Google (scholar), National Center for Biotechnology Information, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure. Data on interventions, participants' characteristics and the outcomes of therapy, were extracted for statistical analysis. Seven trials fulfilled the inclusion criteria.

RESULT

The treatment with ceftazidime plus amikacin was more effective than meropenem (OR = 1.17; 95% CI 0.93-1.46; 1270 participants). However, the treatment effects of the 2 therapy methods were almost parallel in adults (OR = 1.15; 95% CI 0.91-1.46; 1130 participants older than 16). Drug-related adverse effects afflicted more patients treated with ceftazidime plus amikacin (OR = 0.78; 95% CI 0.52-1.15; 1445 participants). The common responses were nausea, diarrhea, rash, and increased in serum glutamic oxaloacetic transaminase, serum glutamic pyruvic transaminase and bilirubin.

CONCLUSION

Ceftazidime plus amikacin should be the first choice for empirical treatment of cancer patients with febrile neutropenia, and meropenem may be chosen as a last defense against pathogenic bacteria.

Management of fever and neutropenia in the adult patient with acute myeloid leukemia

INTRODUCTION

Febrile neutropenia represents one of the most common treatment-associated complications in the management of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and is considered an oncologic emergency. Rapid and detailed workup as well as the initiation of empiric broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy are critical to avoid sepsis and to reduce mortality. Although a definitive source of infection is frequently not identified, the severely immunosuppressed status of the AML patient undergoing cytotoxic therapy results in a high risk for a wide array of bacterial, fungal, and viral etiologies.

AREAS COVERED

The authors herein review the diagnostic and therapeutic approach to the neutropenic leukemia patient based on the current knowledge. Special consideration is given to the rapidly changing therapeutic landscape in AML, creating new challenges in the management of infectious complications.

EXPERT OPINION

Multidrug-resistant organisms pose a major challenge in the management of neutropenic fever patients with hematologic malignancies - including AML. Future directions to improve outcomes demand innovative treatment approaches as well as advances in biomarker research to facilitate diagnosis and disease monitoring. Recent achievements in AML-targeted therapy led to an increased incidence of differentiation syndrome, a potentially life-threatening side effect that frequently resembles clinical infection and requires prompt recognition and aggressive intervention.

The cost-effectiveness of empirical antibiotic treatments for high-risk febrile neutropenic patients: A decision analytic model

PURPOSE

Febrile neutropenia has a significant clinical and economic impact on cancer patients. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of different current empiric antibiotic treatments.

METHODS

A decision analytic model was constructed to compare the use of cefepime, meropenem, imipenem/cilastatin, and piperacillin/tazobactam for treatment of high-risk patients. The analysis was performed from the perspective of U.S.-based hospitals. The time horizon was defined to be a single febrile neutropenia episode. Cost-effectiveness was determined by calculating costs and deaths averted. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves for various willingness-to-pay thresholds (WTP), were used to address the uncertainty in cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS

The base-case analysis results showed that treatments were equally effective but differed mainly in their cost. In increasing order: treatment with imipenem/cilastatin cost $52,647, cefepime $57,270, piperacillin/tazobactam $57,277, and meropenem $63,778. In the probabilistic analysis, mean costs were $52,554 (CI: $52,242-$52,866) for imipenem/cilastatin, $57,272 (CI: $56,951-$57,593) for cefepime, $57,294 (CI: $56,978-$57,611) for piperacillin/tazobactam, and $63,690 (CI: $63,370-$64,009) for meropenem. Furthermore, with a WTP set at $0 to $50,000, imipenem/cilastatin was cost-effective in 66.2% to 66.3% of simulations compared to all other high-risk options.

DISCUSSION

Imipenem/cilastatin is a cost-effective strategy and results in considerable health care cost-savings at various WTP thresholds. Cost-effectiveness analyses can be used to differentiate the treatments of febrile neutropenia in high-risk patients.

Decrease in vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus colonization associated with a reduction in carbapenem use as empiric therapy for febrile neutropenia in patients with acute leukemia

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effects of empiric carbapenems versus cycling cefepime and piperacillin/tazobactam on the rates of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) colonization, bloodstream infections, and outcomes of patients admitted with acute leukemia.

DESIGN

Retrospective clinical study with VRE molecular strain typing and gastrointestinal microbiome comparison.

SETTING

A regional referral center for acute leukemia.

PATIENTS

342 consecutive patients admitted with newly diagnosed acute leukemia.

METHODS

In September 2015, we changed our empiric antibiotic of choice for neutropenic fever from a carbapenem to the cycling regimen. We studied 214 consecutive patients during the carbapenem period and 128 during the cycling period. Surveillance for VRE stool colonization was conducted weekly. Representative stool samples were analyzed for VRE MLST types and changes in the composition and diversity of the fecal microbiota.

RESULTS

The change in empiric antibiotics was associated with a significant decrease in VRE colonization (hazard ratio [HR], 0.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27-0.66), a switch in the dominant VRE MLST types on the unit, and some modifications in the gastrointestinal microbiome. There were no differences in total gram-positive or gram-negative BSIs. During the carbapenem period, we observed higher absolute numbers of Candida spp and fewer ESBL BSIs, but these did not reach statistical significance. Patients during the carbapenem period had longer lengths of stay and durations of severe neutropenia and 10% higher hospital cost.

CONCLUSIONS

Carbapenem-sparing empiric antibiotic regimens may have advantages related to VRE ecology, gastrointestinal dysbiosis, duration of neutropenia, cost and length of stay.

Is hospital-acquired pneumonia different in transplant recipients?

Hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) are serious complications in transplant patients. The aim of this review is to summarize the evidence regarding nosocomial pneumonia in transplant recipients, including HAP in non-ventilated patients and VAP, and to identify future directions for improvement.A comprehensive literature search in the PubMed/MEDLINE database was performed. Articles written in English and published between 1990 and November 2018 were included. HAP/VAP in transplant patients usually occurs early post-transplant, particularly during neutropenia in haematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients. Bacteria are the leading cause of nosocomial pneumonia for both immunocompetent and transplant recipients, being Gram negative organisms, and especially Pseudomonas aeruginosa, highly prevalent. Multidrug-resistant bacteria are of special concern. Pneumonia in the transplant setting may be caused by opportunistic pathogens, and the differential diagnosis needs to be extended to other non-infectious complications. The most relevant opportunistic pathogens are Aspergillus fumigatus, Pneumocystis jirovecii and cytomegalovirus. Nevertheless, they are an exceptional cause of nosocomial pneumonia, and usually occur in severely immunosuppressed patients not receiving antimicrobial prophylaxis. Performing bronchoalveolar lavage may improve the rate of aetiological diagnosis, leading to a change in therapeutic management and improved outcomes. The optimal length of antibiotic therapy for bacterial HAP/VAP has not been well defined, but it should perhaps be longer than in the general population. Mortality associated with HAP/VAP is high. HAP/VAP in transplant patients is frequent and is associated with increased mortality. There is room for improvement in gaining knowledge about the management of HAP/VAP in this population.

[Impact of duration of antibiotic therapy on the prognosis of patients with acute myeloid leukemia who had Gram-negative bloodstream infection in consolidation chemotherapy]

目的

分析巩固化疗期间伴发革兰阴性菌（G⁻菌）血流感染的急性髓系白血病（AML）患者抗感染疗程对感染转归的影响。

方法

回顾性分析2010年9月至2016年1月入组“依据危险度分层对急性髓系白血病优化治疗的研究”临床试验的591例AML（非急性早幼粒细胞白血病）患者的血流感染资料，将其中巩固化疗期间发生G⁻菌血流感染且持续发热时间<7 d的114例次血流感染（89例患者）纳入研究，分析抗感染疗程对感染转归的影响。

结果

114例次血流感染发生时，患者中位ANC为0（0~5.62）×10⁹/L，中性粒细胞缺乏（粒缺）持续的中位时间为9（3~26）d，抗感染治疗的中位时间为7（4~14）d。抗感染疗程≤7 d与>7 d组比较，停药后3 d内再发热比例、再次发生相同菌株血流感染比例分别为1.2%对3.0%、18.5%对21.2%，差异均无统计学意义（P=0.522，OR=0.400，95%CI 0.024~6.591；P=0.741，OR=0.844，95%CI 0.309~2.307）。同时，两组患者均未发生7 d及30 d内感染相关死亡。且倾向性评分平衡患者特征及用药差异因素后，抗感染疗程≤7 d较>7 d组再次发生相同菌株血流感染比例仍无明显增高（P=0.525，OR=0.663，95%CI 0.187~2.352）。

结论

对于巩固化疗期间伴发G⁻菌血流感染的AML患者，若发热时间<7 d，敏感抗菌药物治疗7 d后停药并不增加停药后3 d内再发热，粒缺期再次出现相同菌株血流感染及感染相关7 d、30 d内死亡风险。提示短疗程抗感染方案可以成为巩固化疗伴发G⁻菌血流感染AML患者感染控制情况下合理的治疗选择。

Diagnosis and Management of Oncologic Emergencies

Oncologic emergencies may be seen in any emergency department and will become more frequent as our population ages and more patients receive chemotherapy. Life-saving interventions are available for certain oncologic emergencies if the diagnosis is made in a timely fashion. In this article we will cover neutropenic fever, tumor lysis syndrome, hypercalcemia of malignancy, and hyperviscosity syndrome. After reading this article the reader should be much more confident in the diagnosis, evaluation, and management of these oncologic emergencies.

Multidrug-resistant Enterobacteriaceae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus: Three major threats to hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients

Hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) recipients are uniquely threatened by the emergence of multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacteria because these patients rely on immediate active antimicrobial therapy to combat bacterial infections. This review describes the epidemiology and treatment considerations for three challenging MDR bacterial pathogens in HSCT recipients: MDR Enterobacteriaceae, including extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-producing and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE), Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE). These bacteria are common causes of infection in this population and bacteremias caused by these organisms are associated with high mortality rates. Carbapenems remain the treatments of choice for serious infections due to ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae in HSCT recipients. Administration of β-lactam agents as an extended infusion is associated with improved outcomes in patients with severe infections caused by P. aeruginosa. Older agents used for the treatment of CRE and MDR P. aeruginosa infections, such as polymyxins and aminoglycosides, have major limitations. Newer agents, such as ceftazidime-avibactam and ceftolozane-tazobactam have great potential for the treatment of Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapemenase-producing CRE and MDR P. aeruginosa, respectively, but more pre-clinical and clinical data are needed to better evaluate their efficacy. Daptomycin dosages ≥8 mg/kg/day are recommended to treat VRE infections in this population, particularly in the setting of increasing daptomycin resistance. Strategies to prevent these infections include strict adherence to recommended infection control practices and multidisciplinary antimicrobial stewardship. Last, gastrointestinal screening to guide empirical therapy and the use of polymerase chain reaction-based rapid diagnostics may decrease the time to administration of appropriate therapy for these infections, thereby leading to improved outcomes.

The Dose-Dependent Efficacy of Cefepime in the Empiric Management of Febrile Neutropenia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite reports questioning its efficacy, cefepime remains a first-line option in febrile neutropenia. We aimed to re-evaluate the role of cefepime in this setting.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed and EMBASE databases to identify randomized comparisons of (1) cefepime vs alternative monotherapy or (2) cefepime plus aminoglycoside vs alternative monotherapy plus aminoglycoside, published until November 28, 2016.

RESULTS

Thirty-two trials, reporting on 5724 patients, were included. Clinical efficacy was similar between study arms (P = .698), but overall mortality was greater among cefepime-treated patients (risk ratio [RR] = 1.321; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.035-1.686; P = .025). Also of note, this effect seemed to stem from trials using low-dose (2 grams/12 hours, 100 mg/kg per day) cefepime monotherapy (RR = 1.682; 95% CI, 1.038-2.727; P = .035). Cefepime was also associated with increased mortality compared with carbapenems (RR = 1.668; 95% CI, 1.089-2.555; P = .019), a finding possibly influenced by cefepime dose, because carbapenems were compared with low-dose cefepime monotherapy in 5 of 9 trials. Treatment failure in clinically documented infections was also more frequent with cefepime (RR = 1.143; 95% CI, 1.004-1.300; P = .043). Toxicity-related treatment discontinuation was more common among patients that received high-dose cefepime (P = .026), whereas low-dose cefepime monotherapy resulted in fewer adverse events, compared with alternative monotherapy (P = .009).

CONCLUSIONS

Cefepime demonstrated increased mortality compared with carbapenems, reduced efficacy in clinically documented infections, and higher rates of toxicity-related treatment discontinuation. The impact of cefepime dosing on these outcomes is important, because low-dose regimens were associated with lower toxicity at the expense of higher mortality.

Clostridium difficile infection following systemic antibiotic administration in randomised controlled trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Antibiotics have been the most important risk factor for Clostridium difficile infection (CDI). However, only data from non-randomised studies have been reviewed. We sought to evaluate the risk for development of CDI associated with the major antibiotic classes by analysing data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs). The PubMed, Cochrane and Scopus databases were searched and the references of selected RCTs were also hand-searched. Eligible studies should have compared only one antibiotic versus another administered systemically. Inclusion of studies comparing combinations of antibiotics was allowed only if the second antibiotic was the same or from the same class or if it was administered in a subset of the enrolled patients who were equally distributed in the two arms. Only a minority of the selected RCTs (79/1332; 5.9%) reported CDI episodes. Carbapenems were associated with more CDI episodes than fluoroquinolones [risk ratio (RR) = 2.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.32-4.49] and cephalosporins (RR = 2.24, 95% CI 1.46-3.42), but not penicillins (RR = 2.53, 95% CI 0.87-7.41). Cephalosporins were associated with more CDIs than penicillins (RR = 2.36, 95% CI 1.32-4.23) and fluoroquinolones (RR = 2.84, 95% CI 1.60-5.06). There was no difference in CDI frequency between fluoroquinolones and penicillins (RR = 1.34, 95% CI 0.55-3.25). Finally, clindamycin was associated with more CDI episodes than cephalosporins and penicillins (RR = 3.92, 95% CI 1.15-13.43). In conclusion, data from RCTs showed that clindamycin and carbapenems were associated with more CDIs than other antibiotics.

Cefepime, a fourth-generation cephalosporin, in complex with manganese, inhibits proteasome activity and induces the apoptosis of human breast cancer cells

Cefepime (FEP), which is a member of the fourth-generation cephalosporin class, has been extensively studied as a biochemical and antimicrobial reagent in recent years. Manganese (Mn) is important in the biochemical and physiological processes of many living organisms, and it is also high expressed in some tumor tissues. In the present study, we aimed to investigate the proteasome-inhibitory and anti-proliferative properties of 8 metal complexes (FEP‑Cu, FEP-Zn, FEP-Co, FEP-Ni, FEP-Cd, FEP-Cr, FEP-Fe, FEP-Mn) in MDA-MB‑231 human breast cancer cells. The FEP-Mn complex was found to be more potent in its ability to inhibit cell proliferation and proteasome activity than the other compounds tested. Moreover, the FEP-Mn complex inhibited proteasomal chymotrypsin-like (CT-like) activity and induced the apoptosis of breast cancer cells in a dose-and time-dependent manner. Furthermore, the MCF-10A cells were much less sensitive to the FEP complexes compared with the MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cells. These results demonstrated that the FEP-Mn(II) complex has the potential to act as a proteasome inhibitor and apoptosis inducer and therefore has possible future applications in cancer chemotherapy.

European guidelines for empirical antibacterial therapy for febrile neutropenic patients in the era of growing resistance: summary of the 2011 4th European Conference on Infections in Leukemia

Owing to increasing resistance and the limited arsenal of new antibiotics, especially against Gram-negative pathogens, carefully designed antibiotic regimens are obligatory for febrile neutropenic patients, along with effective infection control. The Expert Group of the 4(th) European Conference on Infections in Leukemia has developed guidelines for initial empirical therapy in febrile neutropenic patients, based on: i) the local resistance epidemiology; and ii) the patient's risk factors for resistant bacteria and for a complicated clinical course. An 'escalation' approach, avoiding empirical carbapenems and combinations, should be employed in patients without particular risk factors. A 'de-escalation' approach, with initial broad-spectrum antibiotics or combinations, should be used only in those patients with: i) known prior colonization or infection with resistant pathogens; or ii) complicated presentation; or iii) in centers where resistant pathogens are prevalent at the onset of febrile neutropenia. In the latter case, infection control and antibiotic stewardship also need urgent review. Modification of the initial regimen at 72-96 h should be based on the patient's clinical course and the microbiological results. Discontinuation of antibiotics after 72 h or later should be considered in neutropenic patients with fever of unknown origin who are hemodynamically stable since presentation and afebrile for at least 48 h, irrespective of neutrophil count and expected duration of neutropenia. This strategy aims to minimize the collateral damage associated with antibiotic overuse, and the further selection of resistance.

Infectious complications of stem cell transplantation

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is an accepted treatment for a variety of hematologic malignancies. The profound immunosuppression these patients experience adversely affects their risk of infection. This risk is much higher than in the general population and requires aggressive diagnostic and therapeutic interventions. The chapter will outline the major infections after HSCT.

The risk of seizures among the carbapenems: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

A consensus exists among clinicians that imipenem/cilastatin is the most epileptogenic carbapenem, despite inconsistencies in the literature.

METHODS

We conducted a meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials comparing carbapenems with each other or with non-carbapenem antibiotics to assess the risk of seizures for imipenem, meropenem, ertapenem and doripenem.

RESULTS

In the risk difference (RD) analysis, there were increased patients with seizure (2 per 1000 persons, 95% CI 0.001, 0.004) among recipients of carbapenems versus non-carbapenem antibiotics. This difference was largely attributed to imipenem as its use was associated with an additional 4 patients per 1000 with seizure (95% CI 0.002, 0.007) compared with non-carbapenem antibiotics, whereas none of the other carbapenems was associated with increased seizure. Similarly, in the pooled OR analysis, carbapenems were associated with a significant increase in the risk of seizures relative to non-carbapenem comparator antibiotics (OR 1.87, 95% CI 1.35, 2.59). The ORs for risk of seizures from imipenem, meropenem, ertapenem and doripenem compared with other antibiotics were 3.50 (95% CI 2.23, 5.49), 1.04 (95% CI 0.61, 1.77), 1.32 (95% CI 0.22, 7.74) and 0.44 (95% CI 0.13, 1.53), respectively. In studies directly comparing imipenem and meropenem, there was no difference in epileptogenicity in either RD or pooled OR analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

The absolute risk of seizures with carbapenems was low, albeit higher than with non-carbapenem antibiotics. Although imipenem was more epileptogenic than non-carbapenem antibiotics, there was no statistically significant difference in the imipenem versus meropenem head-to-head comparison.

Cefepime monotherapy for febrile neutropenia in patients with lung cancer

We assessed the efficacy and safety of cefepime monotherapy (1 g intravenously every 8 h) for febrile neutropenia in patients with lung cancer in a multi-institutional phase II study. Patients treated with chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy for lung cancer were eligible for this study. Other eligibility criteria included fever (temperature of ≥38.0 °C) and an absolute neutrophil count of <500/mm(3) or <1000/mm(3) with an expected decline to <500/mm(3) within the next 48 h. Risk assessment was performed using the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer risk-index score. Cefepime 1 g was given intravenously every 8 h. The primary endpoint was the response rate at the end of cefepime therapy. Co-administration of granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor was permitted. Of 54 patients enrolled, 39 were classified in the low-risk group and 15 in the high-risk group. Overall response rate was 78% (95% CI: 64.4-88.0%). The response rates were 85% (95% CI: 69.5-94.1%) in the low-risk group and 60% (95% CI: 32.3-83.7%) in the high-risk group, respectively. One patient died from septic shock due to Enterobacter cloacae bacteremia. There was no significant adverse event. Cefepime 1 g intravenously every 8 h appears to be effective for febrile neutropenia in patients with lung cancer, especially in those with low-risk febrile neutropenia, and is well tolerated.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN Clinical Trials Registry, UMIN000006157.

Targeted therapy against multi-resistant bacteria in leukemic and hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients: guidelines of the 4th European Conference on Infections in Leukemia (ECIL-4, 2011)

The detection of multi-resistant bacterial pathogens, particularly those to carbapenemases, in leukemic and stem cell transplant patients forces the use of old or non-conventional agents as the only remaining treatment options. These include colistin/polymyxin B, tigecycline, fosfomycin and various anti-gram-positive agents. Data on the use of these agents in leukemic patients are scanty, with only linezolid subjected to formal trials. The Expert Group of the 4(th) European Conference on Infections in Leukemia has developed guidelines for their use in these patient populations. Targeted therapy should be based on (i) in vitro susceptibility data, (ii) knowledge of the best treatment option against the particular species or phenotype of bacteria, (iii) pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic data, and (iv) careful assessment of the risk-benefit balance. For infections due to resistant Gram-negative bacteria, these agents should be preferably used in combination with other agents that remain active in vitro, because of suboptimal efficacy (e.g., tigecycline) and the risk of emergent resistance (e.g., fosfomycin). The paucity of new antibacterial drugs in the near future should lead us to limit the use of these drugs to situations where no alternative exists.

Antibiotic and other lock treatments for tunnelled central venous catheter-related infections in children with cancer

BACKGROUND

The risk of developing a tunnelled central venous catheter (CVC)-related infection ranges between 0.1 and 2.3 per 1000 catheter days for children with cancer. These infections are difficult to treat with systemic antibiotics (salvage rate 24% - 66%) due to biofilm formation in the CVC. Lock treatments can achieve 100 - 1000 times higher concentrations locally without exposure to high systemic concentrations.

OBJECTIVES

Our objective was to investigate the efficacy of antibiotic and other lock treatments in the treatment of CVC-related infections in children with cancer compared to a control intervention. We also assessed adverse events of lock treatments.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, issue 3, 2011), MEDLINE/PubMed (1945 to August 2011) and EMBASE/Ovid (1980 to August 2011). In addition we searched reference lists from relevant articles and the conference proceedings of the International Society for Paediatric Oncology (SIOP) (from 2006 to 2010), American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) (from 2006 to 2010), the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) (from 2006 to 2011), the American Society of Hematology (ASH) (from 2006 to 2010) and the International Society of Thrombosis and Haematology (ISTH) (from 2006 to 2011). We scanned the ISRCTN Register and the National Institute of Health Register for ongoing trials (www.controlled-trials.com) (August 2011).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) comparing an antibiotic lock or other lock treatment (with or without concomitant systemic antibiotics) with a control intervention (other lock treatment with or without concomitant systemic antibiotics or systemic antibiotics alone) for the treatment of CVC-related infections in children with cancer. For the description of adverse events, cohort studies were also eligible for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected studies, extracted data and performed 'Risk of bias' assessments of included studies. Analyses were performed according to the guidelines of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.

MAIN RESULTS

Two RCTs evaluated urokinase lock treatment with concomitant systemic antibiotics (n = 56) versus systemic antibiotics alone (n = 48), and one CCT evaluated ethanol lock treatment with concomitant systemic antibiotics (n = 15) versus systemic antibiotics alone (n = 13). No RCTs or CCTs evaluating antibiotic lock treatments were identified. All studies had methodological limitations and clinical heterogeneity between studies was present. We found no evidence of significant difference between ethanol or urokinase lock treatments with concomitant systemic antibiotics and systemic antibiotics alone regarding the number of participants cured, the number of recurrent CVC-related infections, the number of days until the first negative blood culture, the number of CVCs prematurely removed, ICU admission and sepsis. Not all studies were included in all analyses. No adverse events occurred in the five publications of cohort studies (one cohort was included in two publications) assessing this outcome; CVC malfunctioning occurred in three out of five publications of cohort studies assessing this outcome.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

No significant effect of urokinase or ethanol lock in addition to systemic antibiotics was found. However, this could be due to low power or a too-short follow-up. The cohort studies identified no adverse events; some cohort studies reported CVC malfunctioning. No RCTs or CCTs were published on antibiotic lock treatment alone. More well-designed RCTs are needed to further explore the effect of antibiotic or other lock treatments in the treatment of CVC-related infections in children with cancer.

Antimicrobial stewardship in patients with cancer

Consensus guidelines recommend antimicrobial stewardship in all hospitals with the following goals in mind: appropriate and judicious use of antimicrobial agents leading to increased drug safety, reduced antimicrobial utilization, reduction in the development and selection of resistant organisms, cost containment, and improved patient outcomes. Patients with cancer, especially those with hematologic malignancies and neutropenia, develop serious infections often and receive antimicrobial therapy frequently. Consequently, there is considerable opportunity to practice antimicrobial stewardship in this population. Several antimicrobial stewardship strategies such as antimicrobial restriction, cycling, prospective audit and feedback, and de-escalation have been evaluated in patients with cancer. The primary focus has been on the prevention and treatment of bacterial infections in febrile neutropenic patients. These efforts should be expanded to include fungal, viral, and other infections.

Economic evaluation in critical care: a focus on severe sepsis in oncology

Hospital care, physician and clinical services, and prescription drugs continue to drive healthcare expenditures across healthcare systems and nations. The critical-care setting, owing to the complexity and intensity of care, is a high user of the resources that drive healthcare spending. Information regarding the cost and effectiveness of critical-care therapies is necessary to properly guide care and policies for this unique population. Many challenges exist for conducting and comparing economic evaluation in critical care. Recently, recommendations on cost and cost-effectiveness analysis in critical care have been developed that will guide future research. A focus area, severe sepsis in oncology, is reviewed to highlight the challenges and opportunities of economic evaluation in this setting.

Epileptogenic potential of carbapenem agents: mechanism of action, seizure rates, and clinical considerations

Antimicrobials are the most frequently implicated class of drugs in drug-induced seizure, with β-lactams being the class of antimicrobials most often implicated. The seizure-inducing potential of the carbapenem subclass may be directly related to their β-lactam ring structure. Data on individual carbapenems and seizure activity are scarce. To evaluate the available evidence on the association between carbapenem agents and seizure activity, we conducted a literature search of the MEDLINE (1966-May 2010), EMBASE (1974-May 2010), and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970-May 2010) databases. Reference citations from the retrieved articles were also reviewed. Mechanistically, seizure propensity of the β-lactams is related to their binding to γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) receptors. There are numerous reports of seizure activity associated with imipenem-cilastatin, with seizure rates ranging from 3-33%. For meropenem, doripenem, and ertapenem, the seizure rate for each agent is reported as less than 1%. However, as their use increases and expands into new patient populations, the rate of seizures with these agents may increase. High-dose therapy, especially in patients with renal dysfunction, preexisting central nervous system abnormalities, or a seizure history increases the likelihood of seizure activity. Although specific studies have not been conducted, data indicate that carbapenem-associated seizure is best managed with benzodiazepines, followed by other agents that enhance GABA transmission. Due to the drug interaction between carbapenems and valproic acid, resulting in clinically significant declines in valproic acid serum concentrations, the combination should be avoided whenever possible. Clinicians should be vigilant regarding the possibility of carbapenem-induced seizures when selecting and dosing antimicrobial therapy.

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.

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.

Anti-pseudomonal beta-lactams for the initial, empirical, treatment of febrile neutropenia: comparison of beta-lactams

BACKGROUND

Several beta-lactams are recommended as single agents for the treatment of febrile neutropenia.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness of different anti-pseudomonal beta-lactams as single agents in the treatment of febrile neutropenia. To compare the development of bacterial resistance, bacterial and fungal superinfections during or following treatment with the different beta-lactams.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochane Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Issue 3, 2010. MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, FDA drug applications, conference proceedings and ongoing clinical trial databases up to August 2010. References of included studies were scanned.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing an antipseudomonal beta-lactam to another antipseudomonal beta-lactam antibiotic, both given alone or with the addition of the same glycopeptide to both study arms, for the initial treatment of fever and neutropenia among cancer patients.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors applied inclusion criteria and extracted the data independently. Missing data were sought. Risk ratios (RR) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI), and pooled using the fixed effect model. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Risk of bias was assessed using a domain-based evaluation and its effect of results was assessed through sensitivity analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-four trials were included. The antibiotics assessed were cefepime, ceftazidime, piperacillin-tazobactam, imipenem and meropenem. Adequate allocation concealment and generation were reported in about half of the trials and only two trials were double-blinded. The risk for all-cause mortality was significantly higher with cefepime compared to other beta-lactams (RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.86, 21 trials, 3471 participants), without heterogeneity and with higher RRs in trials at low risk for bias. There were no differences in secondary outcomes but for a non-significantly higher rate of bacterial superinfections with cefepime. Mortality was significantly lower with piperacillin-tazobactam compared to other antibiotics (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.92, 8 trials, 1314 participants), without heterogeneity. Carbapenems resulted in similar all-cause mortality and a lower rate of clinical failure and antibiotic modifications as compared to other antibiotics, but a higher rate of diarrhea caused by Clostridium difficile.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence supports the use of piperacillin-tazobactam in locations where antibiotic resistance profiles do not mandate empirical use of carbapenems. Carbapenems result in a higher rate of antibiotic-associated and Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea. There is a high level of evidence that all-cause mortality is higher with cefepime compared to other beta-lactams and it should not be used as monotherapy for patients with febrile neutropenia.

Imipenem-cilastatin versus piperacillin-tazobactam as monotherapy in febrile neutropenia

BACKGROUND

In view of the recent trend toward monotherapy in the treatment of febrile neutropenia, we evaluated the clinical efficacy and safety of imipenem-cilastatin versus piperacillin-tazobactam as an empiric therapy for febrile neutropenia in children with malignant diseases.

METHODS

Febrile neutropenic patients received either imipenem-cilastatin or piperacillin-tazobactam randomly. Improvement without any changes in the initial antibiotic treatment was defined as "success" and improvement with modification of the initial treatment and death was defined as "failure".

RESULTS

Over 12 months, 99 febrile neutropenic episodes were treated with monotherapy in 63 patients with a median age of 5 years. At admission, median absolute neutrophil count was 50/mm(3) and in 67% of episodes, neutrophil count was under 100/mm(3). Median duration of neutropenia was 5 days. In 22% of episodes, neutropenia persisted for more than 10 days. Piperacillin-tazobactam was used in 52 episodes and imipenem-cilastatin was used in 47 episodes. There was no difference between groups in terms of age, sex, primary diseases, neutrophil count or duration of neutropenia. In the whole group, the success rate was 67% and the failure rate was 33%, whereas in the piperacillin-tazobactam group, the rates were 71% and 29%; and in the imipenem-cilastatin group they were 62% and 38%, respectively (P > 0.05). There were no deaths. No major adverse effects were seen in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

Although failure was slightly higher in the imipenem-cilastatin group, this was statistically insignificant. Both of these antibiotics can be used safely for initial empirical monotherapy of febrile neutropenia.

Low-dose beta-lactam plus amikacin in febrile neutropenia: cefepime vs. piperacillin/tazobactam, a randomized trial

Patients with fever and granulocytopenia are at risk of developing severe infection. We performed a prospective, randomized trial to evaluate the efficacy of low-dose cefepime plus amikacin (C-A) compared to low-dose piperacillin/tazobactam plus amikacin (PT-A). Patients received cefepime (2 g/12 h) plus amikacin (15 mg/kg/day) or piperacillin/tazobactam (4 g/500 mg/8 h) plus amikacin. A total of 317 episodes of febrile granulocytopenia in 190 patients were studied (152 in the C-A group, 165 in the PT-A group). A microbiologically documented infection was present in 53 (35%) episodes in the C-A group and 41 (25%) episodes in the PT-A group (p = ns); a clinically documented infection was observed in 39 (26%) and 47 (28%) episodes, respectively. Toxicity was observed in 6 (4%) episodes in the C-A group and in 5 (3%) episodes in the PT-A group. The antibiotic success rate (no change or addition of antibiotics) was recorded in 89 (59%) and 105 (64%) cases, respectively (p = ns). Mortality related to infection was similar in each arm (3.9% vs. 3.6%). Combination therapy of low-dose beta-lactam with an aminoglycoside achieves very good response rates and low rates of toxicity. It might be an attractive option in an environment of increasing resistance among gram-negative bacteria.

High incidence of meropenem resistance among alpha-hemolytic streptococci in children with cancer

BACKGROUND

Infections caused by antibiotics-resistant Gram-positive bacteria have been reported from many pediatric hematology-oncology centers.

METHODS

The susceptibility profiles to meropenem, piperacillin, and vancomycin among oral flora isolates of alpha-hemolytic streptococci (AHS) obtained from six children with cancer who received several empirical therapies (ET) against febrile neutropenia, were investigated.

RESULTS

Meropenem minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of AHS isolated from ET patients was 2.167 +/- 0.258 microg/mL (mean +/- SD), which was significantly higher than the MIC of AHS isolated from control groups. Intriguingly, AHS isolated approximately 6 months after hospital discharge indicated recovery of susceptibility to meropenem.

CONCLUSIONS

AHS isolates from neutropenic children with cancer should be checked for antibiotic susceptibility, even against carbapenems.

Rapid method for detection of minimal bactericidal concentration of antibiotics

We developed a test for rapid determination of the minimal bactericidal concentration (MBC) of antibiotics. MBC is determined by calculating the relative proportion of live and dead bacteria by means of two fluorescence dyes: Syto 9 (which detects only live bacteria) and Propidium iodide (which labels live and dead bacteria). Testing was performed in micro-titer plates. Determination of bacterial viability was performed after exposure to antibiotics for 4 h. Reference strains and clinical isolates of Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa were tested. Fluorescence-based determination (MBC/F) and reference methods (MBC/L) were comparable (+/-1 Dilution step), except for E. coli with piperacillin and cefotaxime, which differed up to two steps. Bactericidal activity against E. coli/P. aeruginosa was observed: Meropenem (100%/100%), gentamicin (100%/9.3%), ciprofloxacin (93.3%/86.7%), cefotaxime (E. coli only: 86.7%) ceftazidime (P. aeruginosa only: 80%), piperacillin (56.6%/76.7%). The calculation of MBC has been achieved by graphical extrapolation and mathematical approximation method.

The safety of cefepime in the treatment of infection

BACKGROUND

Cefepime is a fourth-generation cephalosporin usually reserved for treating severe nosocomial pneumonia, as well as empirical treatment of febrile neutropenia, uncomplicated and complicated urinary tract infections, uncomplicated skin and skin structure infections, and complicated intra-abdominal infections.

OBJECTIVE

Since reports of neurotoxic effects and of an all-cause mortality higher with cefepime than with comparators have created some concerns regarding its safety, this paper reviews data available in the PubMed database up to December 2007 on cefepime safety.

METHODS

Literature data from PubMed obtained by combining cefepime and safety, or cefepime and clinical trials, were examined.

RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS

Caution in the use of cefepime should be adopted until new evidence on cefepime safety is available.

Carbapenems versus other beta-lactams in treating severe infections in intensive care: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials

Carbapenems have not been comprehensively compared in clinical trials with fourth-generation cephalosporins (4GC) and antipseudomonal penicillins (APP) in the treatment of severe infections (SI) and febrile neutropenia (FN). A systematic review of CENTRAL, EMBASE, MEDLINE and JICST-EPlus for randomised controlled trials was conducted to establish the currently available evidence. Database searching was supplemented by hand searching and contacting conference organisers. Searching was completed in November 2006 and no restriction was placed on the language of publication. Data were extracted on clinical response, bacteriologic response, all-cause mortality and adverse events. Of the 265 papers identified, 12 were appropriate for meta-analysis (four 4GC and eight APP). The results showed that carbapenems are associated with a significant reduction in all-cause mortality (relative risk 0.62, 95% confidence interval: 0.41 to 0.95; p=0.03) compared to APP in the treatment of SI, and withdrawals due to adverse events (RR 0.65, 95% CI: 0.45 to 0.96; p=0.03) are also less common. When compared in the treatment of FN, carbapenems are associated with a significant increase in clinical response during the initial 72 h of treatment (RR 1.37, 95% CI: 1.09 to 1.74; p=0.008) and bacteriologic response (RR 1.73, 95% CI: 1.03 to 2.89; p=0.04). For all other outcomes, including all comparisons with 4GC, there were no significant differences between treatments. The use of carbapenems rather than APP could reduce mortality and, by simplifying treatment decisions, reduce the time before patients receive appropriate antibiotic treatment. The currently available evidence is insufficient for distinguishing between carbapenems and 4GC.

Simultaneous determination of cefepime and vancomycin in plasma and cerebrospinal fluid by MEKC with direct sample injection and application for bacterial meningitis

A simple MEKC with UV detection at 214 nm for simultaneous analysis of cefepime and vancomycin in plasma and in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) by direct injection without any sample pretreatment is described. The separation of cefepime and vancomycin from biological matrices was performed at 25 degrees C using a BGE consisting of a Tris buffer with SDS and methanol as the electrolyte solution. Under optimal MEKC conditions for biological samples, good separations with high efficiency and short analysis time are achieved. Several parameters affecting the separation of the drugs from biological matrices were studied, including methanol, pH, and concentrations of the Tris buffer and SDS. The linear ranges of the method for the determination of cefepime and vancomycin in plasma and in CSF using imidazole or cefazolin as an internal standard, respectively, were all over the range of 1-30 microg/mL; the detection limits of cefepime and vancomycin in biological matrices (injection 10 kV, 15 s) were 0.3 and 0.5 microg/mL, respectively. The applicability of the proposed method for the determination of cefepime and vancomycin in plasma and CSF collected after intravenous administration of the drugs in patients with meningitis was demonstrated.

Efficacy and safety of cefepime: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Cefepime is a broad-spectrum cephalosporin with enhanced coverage against Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria. We did a systematic review of randomised trials that compared cefepime with another beta-lactam antibiotic, alone or with the addition of a non-beta-lactam antibiotic to both study groups. We searched Central, PubMed, Embase, Lilacs, new US Food and Drug Administration drug applications, conference proceedings, and references of the included studies. Two reviewers independently did the search and data extraction. 57 trials were included. All-cause mortality-the primary outcome-was higher with cefepime than other beta-lactams (risk ratio [RR] 1.26 [95% CI 1.08-1.49]). Sensitivity analyses by the trials' methodological quality revealed higher RRs for trials reporting adequate allocation-sequence generation (1.52 [1.20-1.92]) and allocation concealment (1.36 [1.09-1.70]). Baseline risk factors for mortality were similar. No significant differences between groups in treatment failure, superinfection, or adverse events were found. This Review provides evidence and offers possible explanations for increased mortality among patients treated with cefepime in randomised trials.

Comparative Review of the Carbapenems

The carbapenems are beta-lactam antimicrobial agents with an exceptionally broad spectrum of activity. Older carbapenems, such as imipenem, were often susceptible to degradation by the enzyme dehydropeptidase-1 (DHP-1) located in renal tubules and required co-administration with a DHP-1 inhibitor such as cilastatin. Later additions to the class such as meropenem, ertapenem and doripenem demonstrated increased stability to DHP-1 and are administered without a DHP-1 inhibitor. Like all beta-lactam antimicrobial agents, carbapenems act by inhibiting bacterial cell wall synthesis by binding to and inactivating penicillin-binding proteins (PBPs). Carbapenems are stable to most beta-lactamases including AmpC beta-lactamases and extended-spectrum beta-lactamases. Resistance to carbapenems develops when bacteria acquire or develop structural changes within their PBPs, when they acquire metallo-beta-lactamases that are capable of rapidly degrading carbapenems, or when changes in membrane permeability arise as a result of loss of specific outer membrane porins. Carbapenems (imipenem, meropenem, doripenem) possess broad-spectrum in vitro activity, which includes activity against many Gram-positive, Gram-negative and anaerobic bacteria; carbapenems lack activity against Enterococcus faecium, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia. Compared with imipenem, meropenem and doripenem, the spectrum of activity of ertapenem is more limited primarily because it lacks activity against Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Enterococcus spp. Imipenem, meropenem and doripenem have in vivo half lives of approximately 1 hour, while ertapenem has a half-life of approximately 4 hours making it suitable for once-daily administration. As with other beta-lactam antimicrobial agents, the most important pharmacodynamic parameter predicting in vivo efficacy is the time that the plasma drug concentration is maintained above the minimum inhibitory concentration (T>MIC). Imipenem/cilastatin and meropenem have been studied in comparative clinical trials establishing their efficacy in the treatment of a variety of infections including complicated intra-abdominal infections, skin and skin structure infections, community-acquired pneumonia, nosocomial pneumonia, complicated urinary tract infections, meningitis (meropenem only) and febrile neutropenia. The current role for imipenem/cilastatin and meropenem in therapy remains for use in moderate to severe nosocomial and polymicrobial infections. The unique antimicrobial spectrum and pharmacokinetic properties of ertapenem make it more suited to treatment of community-acquired infections and outpatient intravenous antimicrobial therapy than for the treatment of nosocomial infections. Doripenem is a promising new carbapenem with similar properties to those of meropenem, although it appears to have more potent in vitro activity against P. aeruginosa than meropenem. Clinical trials are required to establish the efficacy and safety of doripenem in moderate to severe infections, including nosocomial infections.

[Management of febrile neutropenic patients]

High risk febrile neutropenia requires hospital treatment. The choice of antibiotic is determined by the resistance patterns of the pathogens predominating in each center. Monotherapy with an antipseudomonal beta-lactam can be the initial choice in most patients. However, initial beta-lactam-aminoglycoside combination therapy should be considered with infectious foci other than the catheter, in non-fermenting Gram-negative colonization, and when the patient has received beta-lactam treatment in the previous month. Combination therapy with glycopeptides should be considered if the focus of infection is the catheter, if there is colonization by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus or severe mucositis and both agents should be administered if there are criteria for severe sepsis. If there is no microbiologically documented infection, glycopeptides and/or aminoglycosides should be withdrawn promptly. Empirical antifungal therapy plays an important role in patients with persistent fever. In severe microbiologically documented infections, therapy should be maintained for a minimum of 14 days. Adjuvant therapy with granulopoiesis-stimulating factors is indicated in most patients.

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.

Experience with cefepime versus meropenem as empiric monotherapy for neutropenia and fever in pediatric patients with solid tumors

A prospective, open-label, randomized, comparative study in pediatric cancer patients was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of cefepime and meropenem in the empiric therapy of febrile neutropenic patients. Febrile episodes were classified as microbiologically documented infection, clinical documented infection, or fever of unknown origin. Clinical response to therapy was classified as success or failure. In this period 37 children with solid tumors including lymphoma, 25 males, 12 females, had neutropenia on 65 occasions. Microbiologically documented infections occurred in 21 episodes (32.31%). Frequency of positive bacteria isolated was higher than gram-negative bacteria. There was no infection-related death. There were no statistical differences between the cefepime and meropenem groups for duration of fever or neutropenia, response rate, and necessity for modification. Cefepime appears to be as effective and safe as meropenem for empiric treatment of febrile episodes in neutropenic pediatric cancer patients.

Empirical antibiotic monotherapy for febrile neutropenia: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

Early, empirical broad-spectrum antibiotic treatment is the established practice for febrile neutropenia. Several beta-lactams are accepted for monotherapy. We asked whether patients' outcomes are influenced by the chosen beta-lactam.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing anti-pseudomonal beta-lactams administered as empirical monotherapy for febrile neutropenia, with or without vancomycin. The search included The Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, Lilacs databases, bibliography, conference proceedings, trial registries and FDA new drug approvals. Two reviewers independently applied selection criteria, performed quality assessment and extracted the data. Trials assessing the same beta-lactam were pooled using the fixed effect model. Relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. The primary outcome assessed was all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

Thirty-three trials fulfilled inclusion criteria. Cefepime was associated with higher all-cause mortality at 30 days than other beta-lactams (RR 1.44, 95% CI 1.06-1.94, 3123 participants). Carbapenems were associated with fewer treatment modifications, including addition of glycopeptides, than ceftazidime or other comparators. Adverse events were significantly more frequent with carbapenems, specifically pseudomembranous colitis (RR 1.94, 95% CI 1.24-3.04, 2025 participants). All-cause mortality was unaltered. Piperacillin/tazobactam was compared only with cefepime and carbapenems, in six trials. No significant differences were demonstrated with paucity of data for all-cause mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of cefepime for febrile neutropenia is associated with increased mortality and should be carefully considered pending further analysis. Empirical use of carbapenems entails fewer treatment modifications, but an increased rate of pseudomembranous colitis. Ceftazidime, piperacillin/tazobactam, imipenem/cilastatin and meropenem appear to be suitable agents for monotherapy.

Simultaneous determination of cefepime and L-arginine by micellar electrokinetic chromato- graphy and applications to commercial injections

A simple micellar electrokinetic chromatography (MEKC) with UV detection is described for simultaneous analysis of cefepime and L-arginine. The determination of cefepime and L-arginine in pharmaceutical preparations was performed at 25degreesC using a background electrolyte consisting of Tris buffer with sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) as the electrolyte solution. Several parameters affecting the separation of the drugs were studied, including the pH and concentrations of the Tris buffer and SDS. Under optimal MEKC conditions, good separation with high efficiency and short analysis times is achieved. Using cefazolin as an internal standard, the linear ranges of the method for the determination of cefepime and L-arginine were over 5-100 microg/mL; the detection limits of cefepime (signal to noise ratio = 3; injection 3.45 kPa, 3 s) and L-arginine (signal to noise ratio = 3; injection 3.45 kPa, 3 s) were 2 microg/mL and 4 microg/ mL, respectively. Applicability of the proposed method for the determination of cefepime and L-arginine in commercial injections was demonstrated.

Perspectives for the management of febrile neutropenic patients with cancer in the 21st century

Over the past several decades, there has been substantial progress in the management of patients with febrile neutropenia. However, the ever-changing patterns of infection, ecology, and antibiotic-resistance trends do not allow the development of treatment guidelines that could be applied universally. Hence, the institution's predominant pathogens and resistance patterns should guide the empirical choice of antimicrobials. Prompt initiation of antimicrobial therapy remains the gold standard. Monotherapy with the newer broad-spectrum antimicrobials has tended to replace the classic combination therapy. Empirical administration of glycopeptides, such as vancomycin, without documentation of a gram-positive infection is not favored. The development of risk-stratification models has allowed for identification of low-risk patients with additional treatment options, such as early discharge and exclusively outpatient treatment with oral antimicrobials. The initiation of empirical antifungal therapy in persistently febrile neutropenic patients has become common practice, especially recently, since the introduction of new, effective, less toxic antifungal drugs. It is hoped that the development of new nonculture-based diagnostic methods will allow for the early detection of invasive fungal infections and, thus, the replacement of empirical antifungal therapy with pathogen-specific, preemptive therapy.

Treating Serious Infections: Focus on Cefepime

Antibiotic resistance among medically important pathogens is curtailing the therapeutic value of many of the standard broad-spectrum antibiotics used for empiric treatment of serious infections. This article presents a brief overview of the etiology of serious infections and the threat of emerging resistance, and reviews the adverse impact of inadequate empiric treatment on patient outcomes and hospital ecology. The treatment of two clinically important infections with cefepime--pneumonia in hospitalized patients and febrile neutropenia--also is discussed.

A prospective, randomized study comparing cefepime and imipenem-cilastatin in the empirical treatment of febrile neutropenia in patients treated for haematological malignancies

A prospective, open label, randomized, multicentre study was conducted, comparing the efficacy and safety of cefepime with that of imipenem-cilastatin for the management of febrile neutropenia in patients with haematological malignancies. Furthermore, the safety of early discontinuation of antibiotic therapy in patients with fever of undetermined origin (FUO) was assessed. A total of 180 patients with 207 febrile episodes were randomized at start of fever (105 episodes for cefepime and 102 episodes for imipenem). The 2 groups were comparable in terms of age, gender, underlying malignancy, prior transplantation, and presence of central venous catheters. All patients were neutropenic at inclusion with median absolute neutrophil count (ANC) 0.1 x 10(9)/l(range 0-1 x 10(9)/l), and ANC < or = 0.1 x 10(9)/l in 77% of included patients. The mean duration of neutropenia, with ANC < 0.5 x 10(9)/l was 6.2 d. Febrile episodes were classified as microbiologically documented infection (47%), FUO (43%), or clinically documented infection (10%). At final evaluation 1-2 weeks after completion of antibiotic therapy, monotherapy success rates were 40% and 51% in the cefepime and imipenem-cilastatin groups respectively (p = 0.33). The 4-week overall mortality rate was 5%. Three (2%) of the cefepime treated patients and 4 (3%) of the imipenem-cilastatin treated patients died as a result of infection. Adverse events directly related to antibiotic treatment were uncommon and did not differ between groups. Early discontinuation of antibiotic therapy in 31 patients with FUO 48 h after defervescence was not associated with an increased rate of fever relapse or mortality compared with a subgroup of 29 patients where therapy was continued.