Randomized controlled monocentric comparison of once daily ceftriaxone with tobramycin and cefotaxime three times daily with tobramycin in neutropenic fever

Once-a-Day Ceftriaxone-Amikacin Combination as Empiric Antibiotic Therapy to Enable Outpatient Management of Febrile Neutropenia in Children-16-Year Experience from a Single Institute

Shailesh KanvindeBackground  To enable outpatient department (OPD) management of febrile neutropenia (FN), we used once-a-day (OD) ceftriaxone-amikacin (CFT-AMK) as empiric antibiotic therapy. Our experience over 16-year period is presented. Methods  This was a retrospective study conducted from January2002 to December2017. Inclusion criteria were <18 years of age, undergoing cancer chemotherapy, and having FN. Exclusion criteria were FN after palliative chemotherapy, bone marrow transplantation, or at diagnosis of malignancy. Empiric CFT-AMK was used in all, except those having respiratory distress, hypotension, altered sensorium, paralytic ileus, or clinical evidence of peritonitis. Admission criteria were age <1 year, acute myeloid leukemia (AML) chemotherapy, poor performance status, need for blood transfusions, convenience, insurance, or persistent fever >48 to 72 hours after CFT-AMK. Outcomes analyzed were response (defervescence within 48-72 hours), OPD management, antibiotic upgrade, and mortality. AML diagnosis, >7 days to absolute neutrophil count >0.5 × 10 ⁹ /L, poor performance status, and malignancy not in remission were considered high-risk FN criteria. Results  CFT-AMK was given in 877/952 (92.2%) FN episodes. Seventy-six percent had hematolymphoid malignancies. Response, antibiotic upgrade, and mortality were seen in 85.7 and 65.5% ( p  < 0.0001), 15 and 45.5% ( p  < 0.0001), and 0 and 2% ( p  = 0.003) of low- and high-risk patients, respectively. Treatment was started in OPD in 52%, of which 21.6% required subsequent admission. Of those initially admitted, early discharge (hospital stay < 5 days) was possible in 24.6%. Forty-one percent episodes were managed entirely on OPD. Overall, 80% of low-risk and 42% of high-risk episodes received treatment wholly or partially on OPD. Conclusion  Our results show empiric OD CFT-AMK allows OPD management for most of the low-risk and a proportion of high-risk FN following chemotherapy in children, without compromising clinical outcomes.

Management of fever in neutropenic patients with different risks of complications

Risk stratification of febrile neutropenic patients can have important implications in terms of management. The first prospectively validated risk scoring system was developed in 1992. A subsequent scoring system was developed in 2000, in which a score of < or =21 predicts a <5% risk for severe complications. Oral combination therapy in an ambulatory or home care setting is acceptable for low-risk patients. Hospital admission is mandatory for high-risk patients. Intravenous monotherapy can be given if neutropenia is anticipated to be of short duration; it is also acceptable if neutropenia is expected to be more prolonged but the patients is stable and do not have an infectious focus. All other patients should receive combination therapy with an aminoglycoside, if infection with a gram-negative pathogen is suspected, or a glycopeptide, if a gram-positive organism is suspected. However, antimicrobial therapy with coverage against gram-negative organisms should always be provided because of the significant mortality associated with these infections.

Once-Daily Oral Levofloxacin Monotherapy versus Piperacillin/Tazobactam Three Times a Day: A Randomized Controlled Multicenter Trial in Patients with Febrile Neutropenia

A prospective, randomized, controlled multicenter trial was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of once-daily oral monotherapy with 500 mg levofloxacin in comparison with 4.5 g piperacillin/tazobactam 3 times a day in patients with low-risk febrile neutropenia. Low risk was defined by oral temperature > or = 38.5 degrees C on one occasion or > or = 38.0 degrees C twice within 24 hours and granulocytopenia < or = 500/microL for less than 10 days. The primary end point was defined as defervescence after 72 hours followed by at least 7 afebrile days. Secondary end points were overall response, time to defervescence, survival on day 30, and toxicity. Thirty-four episodes were included. Fever of unknown origin accounted for 26 (76.5%) of the episodes, microbiologically defined infection for 5 (14.7%) of the episodes, and clinically defined infection for 3 (8.8%) of the episodes. On an intent-to-treat basis, all episodes were evaluable for the primary end point. Levofloxacin and piperacillin/tazobactam were successful after 72 hours of treatment in 76.5% and 88.3% of the episodes. Overall response was achieved in 94.1% and 100% of the episodes, respectively. One inpatient in the oral treatment group died of septic shock without identification of a causative pathogen. A larger phase III trial is warranted to further evaluate the lack of inferiority of the oral monotherapy regimen versus standard intravenous therapy.

Ceftriaxone in febrile neutropenia

Standard management of febrile neutropenia requires prompt administration of empirical, broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy, since febrile neutropenia is associated with a significant risk of infectious complications and mortality. Risk-assessment models have been developed that differentiate febrile patients with neutropenia according to their risk for infectious complications and/or mortality and have prompted a change in the management of these patients. Ceftriaxone is a long-lasting, broad spectrum cephalosporin which has demonstrated efficacy in this indication in many publications. The role of ceftriaxone in febrile neutropenia will be discussed based on literature analysis and on the author's experience.

Piperacillin-tazobactam is more effective than ceftriaxone plus gentamicin in febrile neutropenic patients with hematological malignancies: a randomized comparison

GOALS

Efficacy and costs of empirical antibacterial therapy in febrile neutropenic patients are important issues. Several strategies have been reported to be similarly effective: monotherapy with cefepime, ceftazidime or a carbapenem or duotherapy with an antipseudomonal beta-lactam antibiotic or ceftriaxone in combination with an aminoglycoside. Piperacillin-tazobactam monotherapy is promising, but its role in this setting still has to be defined.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Of 212 consecutive febrile episodes in 130 neutropenic patients with hematological malignancies randomized to receive either piperacillin-tazobactam (4.5 g every 8 h; group A) or ceftriaxone (2 g once daily plus gentamicin 5 mg/kg once daily; group B), 183 episodes (98 group A, 85 group B) were evaluable for response.

RESULTS

Defervescence within 72 h without modification of the antibiotic therapy was achieved in 56/98 episodes (57.1%) in group A and in 30/85 (35.3%) in group B (P=0.0047). If fever persisted, teicoplanin plus gentamicin (group A) or teicoplanin plus ciprofloxacin (group B) were added. All patients still febrile then received meropenem, teicoplanin and amphotericin B. With these modifications of antibiotic therapy, 89.8% of patients in group A had responded at 21 days but only 71.8% in group B (P=0.005). The mean total antibiotic drug cost in group A was only 39.4% of that in group B (euro 445 versus euro 1129; P=0.010).

CONCLUSION

Piperacillin-tazobactam monotherapy is significantly more effective and cost-efficient than ceftriaxone plus gentamicin as first-line therapy in febrile neutropenic patients with hematological malignancies.

Treatment of febrile neutropenia: what is new?

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

To identify the more recent challenges in the treatment of patients with febrile neutropenia following antineoplastic chemotherapy or bone marrow transplant published in the English language in the period late 2000-early 2002 regarding: changes in etiology of bacteremia in neutropenic patients; new options for initial empirical antibacterial therapy; factors associated with the risk of developing infection in cancer patients; prediction of prognosis in febrile neutropenia; oral therapy; need for a specific anti-Gram-positive coverage in persistently febrile and neutropenic patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Findings may be summarized according with the identified topics as follows: many centers are reporting an increase in the incidence of Gram-negative bacteremias; piperacillin-tazobactam could be safely administered as monotherapy of febrile neutropenia; congenital factors and intensity of chemotherapy and other medical interventions, such as antifungal prophylaxis, are recognized as of increasing importance in the determination of infectious risk; it is now possible to identify patients with a good prognosis (low risk) by means of validated scoring systems; oral therapy is feasible in low risk patients; the empirical addition of a glycopeptide in persistently febrile neutropenic patients is not indicated.

SUMMARY

Many of the identified points may have a great impact in the daily management of febrile granulocytopenic patients. However, all recent epidemiological and therapeutical studies underline the absoloute need for the knowledge of the pattern of infecting organisms in each center.