Reappraisal With Meta-Analysis of the Addition of Gram-Positive Prophylaxis to Fluoroquinolone in Neutropenic Patients

Optimal Primary Prophylaxis for Febrile Neutropenia During Neoadjuvant Cisplatin and 5-Fluorouracil Plus Docetaxel for Esophageal Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) with docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) (DCF) is the standard treatment for locally advanced esophageal cancer (LAEC). DCF is associated with a high risk of febrile neutropenia (FN), but the optimal primary prophylaxis remains unclear. The present study aimed to assess risk factors for FN and efficacy of primary prophylaxis using granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) and antibiotics in LAEC patients treated with DCF.

METHODS

Patients with LAEC who received DCF as NAC between January 2016 and June 2022 at Aichi Cancer Center Hospital were retrospectively analyzed. DCF consisted of docetaxel 70 mg/m2 on day 1, cisplatin 70 mg/m2 on day 1, and 5-FU 750 mg/m2 by continuous infusion over 5 days. The patients were divided into Cohort A [no G-CSF], B1 (G-CSF after day 6), and B2 (G-CSFon day 3-4). The efficacy of primary prophylaxis with G-CSF and antibiotics during the first cycle was evaluated. The potential FN risk factors were evaluated using univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

Among the 156 patients with esophageal cancer who received DCF as NAC, 41 (26%) patients developed FN during the first cycle. Multivariate analysis revealed that prophylactic antibiotics (17% vs. 40%; adjusted OR, 0.34; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.16-0.73; p = 0.006) and G-CSF (6% vs. 35%; adjusted OR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.04-0.47; p = 0.002) were associated with lower FN incidence. The grade 3/4 neutropenia rates were 84%, 43%, and 13% in cohorts A, B1, and B2, respectively. FN incidence was 35%, 13%, and 0% in the respective cohorts. Treatment-related death occurred in 2% of patients, none of whom received G-CSF prophylaxis.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic G-CSF and antibiotics reduce the risk of FN in patients with LAEC treated with DCF. Early timing of G-CSF administration showed a potential trend toward reduced FN risk and may offer additional benefits; however, these findings must be validated.

Predictive and risk factor analysis for bloodstream infection in high-risk hematological patients with febrile neutropenia: post-hoc analysis from a prospective, large-scale clinical study

OBJECTIVES

Bloodstream infection (BSI) is a frequent complication observed in patients with febrile neutropenia (FN). BSI risk factors and incidence vary depending on chemotherapy types and prophylactic antimicrobial agents. We clarified these issues by post-hoc analysis of a prospective clinical trial cohort for severe FN in hematological malignancy.

METHODS

We performed an intention-to-treat analysis of 413 high-risk patients and 1272 blood culture sets.

RESULTS

Overall, 356 patients (86.2%) developed FN, and 20.8% had BSI complications. Prophylactic antimicrobials did not prevent complications of FN and BSI, but the incidence of BSIs of Gram-negative (GN) bacteria was lower than in the non-prophylaxis group (23.8% vs. 56.7%). Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) scores < 20 were significantly correlated with the incidence of BSI, whereas MASCC scores > 21 were not (41.7% vs. 17.2%). The only significant risk factors were hypotension and dehydration. axillary temperatures were higher in GN-caused BSIs than in Gram-positive-caused BSIs and in patients with negative blood culture results (38.7 °C vs. 38.2 °C vs. 38.0 °C). The higher the fever, the higher the incidence of BSI and GN bacteremia.

CONCLUSIONS

MASCC score and axillary temperature are strong predictors of BSI. Non-administration of prophylactic antimicrobials and GN-caused BSI are correlated.

THE CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

UMIN00010411.

Primary prophylaxis of bacterial infections and Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia in patients with hematologic malignancies and solid tumors: 2020 updated guidelines of the Infectious Diseases Working Party of the German Society of Hematology and Medical Oncology (AGIHO/DGHO)

Hematologic and oncologic patients with chemo- or immunotherapy-related immunosuppression are at substantial risk for bacterial infections and Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PcP). As bacterial resistances are increasing worldwide and new research reshapes our understanding of the interactions between the human host and bacterial commensals, administration of antibacterial prophylaxis has become a matter of discussion. This guideline constitutes an update of the 2013 published guideline of the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) of the German Society for Hematology and Medical Oncology (DGHO). It gives an overview about current strategies for antibacterial prophylaxis in cancer patients while taking into account the impact of antibacterial prophylaxis on the human microbiome and resistance development. Current literature published from January 2012 to August 2020 was searched and evidence-based recommendations were developed by an expert panel. All recommendations were discussed and approved in a consensus conference of the AGIHO prior to publication. As a result, we present a comprehensive update and extension of our guideline for antibacterial and PcP prophylaxis in cancer patients.

Evaluation of a 0.75 × 109 /L absolute neutrophil count cut-off for antimicrobial prophylaxis in canine cancer chemotherapy patients

Absolute neutrophil count (ANC) cut-offs for antimicrobial prophylaxis in veterinary cancer chemotherapy patients are empirical and vary between institutions. Evidence based cut-offs are vital for antimicrobial stewardship, particularly as global antimicrobial resistance rises. The primary objectives of this study were to evaluate the tolerability of a <0.75 × 10⁹ /l ANC cut-off for antimicrobial prophylaxis in dogs after receiving chemotherapy and its impact on antimicrobial prescription. Predicted nadir ANCs (pnANCs) were stratified into six groups (<0.75 × 10⁹ /l [receiving antimicrobial prophylaxis], 0.75-0.99 × 10⁹ /l, 1-1.49 × 10⁹ /l, 1.5-1.99 × 10⁹ /l, 2.0-3.59 × 10⁹ /l and 3.6-12 × 10⁹ /l [reference interval]). The incidences of post-nadir febrile neutropenia (FN) and non-haematological toxicity (NHT) were compared between groups. Five hundred and eighty-six pnANCs were recorded for 181 dogs. There were four episodes of post-nadir FN and 90 episodes of post-nadir NHT. There was no significant difference in incidence of post-nadir FN (P = .063) or post-nadir NHT (P = .084) between pnANC groups. Antimicrobial prophylaxis was prescribed following 8.8% of the chemotherapy administrations; had cut-off values of <1.0 × 10⁹ /l or <1.5 × 10⁹ /l been used it would have been prescribed in 15.3% and 25.8% of cases respectively. An ANC cut-off of <0.75 × 10⁹ /l for antimicrobial prophylaxis appears to be well tolerated and minimizes the prescription of antimicrobials.

Antibiotic prophylaxis in veterinary cancer chemotherapy: A review and recommendations

Bacterial infection following cancer chemotherapy-induced neutropenia is a serious cause of morbidity and mortality in human and veterinary patients. Antimicrobial prophylaxis is controversial in the human oncology field, as any decreased incidence in bacterial infections is countered by patient adverse effects and increased antimicrobial resistance. Comprehensive guidelines exist to aid human oncologists in prescribing antimicrobial prophylaxis but similar recommendations are not available in veterinary literature. As the veterinarian's role in antimicrobial stewardship is increasingly emphasized, it is vital that veterinary oncologists implement appropriate antimicrobial use. By considering the available human and veterinary literature we present an overview of current clinical practices and are able to suggest recommendations for prophylactic antimicrobial use in veterinary cancer chemotherapy patients.

Adverse Effects of Intravenous Vancomycin-Based Prophylaxis during Therapy for Pediatric Acute Myeloid Leukemia

Children and adolescents with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) are at risk of life-threatening bacterial infections, especially with viridans group streptococci. Primary antibacterial prophylaxis with vancomycin-based regimens reduces this risk but might increase the risks of renal or liver toxicity or Clostridium difficile infection (CDI). A retrospective review of data for patients treated for newly diagnosed AML at St. Jude Children's Research Hospital between 2002 and 2008 was conducted. Nephrotoxicity was classified according to pediatric risk, injury, failure, loss, and end-stage renal disease (pRIFLE) criteria and hepatotoxicity according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) criteria. The risks of nephrotoxicity, hepatotoxicity, and CDI were compared between patients receiving vancomycin-based prophylaxis, no intravenous prophylaxis, or other prophylaxis. Generalized linear mixed models were used to address potential confounding. A total of 392 chemotherapy courses (108 with no intravenous prophylaxis, 218 with vancomycin-based prophylaxis, and 66 with other prophylaxis) for 111 patients were included. Development of pRIFLE risk, injury, and failure occurred in 190, 44, and 2 courses, respectively. Increases of at least one, two, and three grades for hepatotoxicity occurred in 189, 52, and 19 courses, respectively. After adjustment for confounders, vancomycin-based prophylaxis was not associated with nephrotoxicity or hepatotoxicity and reduced the risk of CDI, compared to no intravenous prophylaxis (0.9% versus 6.5%; P = 0.007) or other prophylactic regimens (0.9% versus 3.0%; P = 0.23). Despite concerns about vancomycin toxicity, vancomycin-based prophylaxis in pediatric patients with AML did not increase the risk of nephrotoxicity or hepatotoxicity and reduced the risk of CDI. Caution is advised to avoid contributing to antibiotic resistance.

Amino acid or peptide conjugates of acridine/acridone and quinoline/quinolone-containing drugs. A critical examination of their clinical effectiveness within a twenty-year timeframe in antitumor chemotherapy and treatment of infectious diseases

Acridines/acridones, quinolines/quinolones (chromophores) and their derivatives constitute extremely important family of compounds in current medicine. Great significance of the compounds is connected with antimicrobial and antitumor activities. Combining these features together in one drug seems to be long-term benefit, especially in oncology therapy. The attractiveness of the chromophore drugs is still enhanced by elimination their toxicity and improvement not only selectivity, specificity but also bioavailability. The best results are reached by conjugation to natural peptides. This paper highlights significant advance in the study of amino acid or peptide chromophore conjugates that provide highly encouraging data for novel drug development. The structures and clinical significance of amino acid or peptide chromophore conjugates are widely discussed.

Infectious diseases in allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation: prevention and prophylaxis strategy guidelines 2016

Infectious complications after allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HCT) remain a clinical challenge. This is a guideline provided by the AGIHO (Infectious Diseases Working Group) of the DGHO (German Society for Hematology and Medical Oncology). A core group of experts prepared a preliminary guideline, which was discussed, reviewed, and approved by the entire working group. The guideline provides clinical recommendations for the preventive management including prophylactic treatment of viral, bacterial, parasitic, and fungal diseases. The guideline focuses on antimicrobial agents but includes recommendations on the use of vaccinations. This is the updated version of the AGHIO guideline in the field of allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation utilizing methods according to evidence-based medicine criteria.

Prophylactic antibiotics or G(M)-CSF for the prevention of infections and improvement of survival in cancer patients receiving myelotoxic chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Febrile neutropenia (FN) and other infectious complications are some of the most serious treatment-related toxicities of chemotherapy for cancer, with a mortality rate of 2% to 21%. The two main types of prophylactic regimens are granulocyte (macrophage) colony-stimulating factors (G(M)-CSF) and antibiotics, frequently quinolones or cotrimoxazole. Current guidelines recommend the use of colony-stimulating factors when the risk of febrile neutropenia is above 20%, but they do not mention the use of antibiotics. However, both regimens have been shown to reduce the incidence of infections. Since no systematic review has compared the two regimens, a systematic review was undertaken.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the efficacy and safety of G(M)-CSF compared to antibiotics in cancer patients receiving myelotoxic chemotherapy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, databases of ongoing trials, and conference proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the American Society of Hematology (1980 to December 2015). We planned to include both full-text and abstract publications. Two review authors independently screened search results.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing prophylaxis with G(M)-CSF versus antibiotics for the prevention of infection in cancer patients of all ages receiving chemotherapy. All study arms had to receive identical chemotherapy regimes and other supportive care. We included full-text, abstracts, and unpublished data if sufficient information on study design, participant characteristics, interventions and outcomes was available. We excluded cross-over trials, quasi-randomised trials and post-hoc retrospective trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the results of the search strategies, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and analysed data according to standard Cochrane methods. We did final interpretation together with an experienced clinician.

MAIN RESULTS

In this updated review, we included no new randomised controlled trials. We included two trials in the review, one with 40 breast cancer patients receiving high-dose chemotherapy and G-CSF compared to antibiotics, a second one evaluating 155 patients with small-cell lung cancer receiving GM-CSF or antibiotics.We judge the overall risk of bias as high in the G-CSF trial, as neither patients nor physicians were blinded and not all included patients were analysed as randomised (7 out of 40 patients). We considered the overall risk of bias in the GM-CSF to be moderate, because of the risk of performance bias (neither patients nor personnel were blinded), but low risk of selection and attrition bias.For the trial comparing G-CSF to antibiotics, all cause mortality was not reported. There was no evidence of a difference for infection-related mortality, with zero events in each arm. Microbiologically or clinically documented infections, severe infections, quality of life, and adverse events were not reported. There was no evidence of a difference in frequency of febrile neutropenia (risk ratio (RR) 1.22; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 2.84). The quality of the evidence for the two reported outcomes, infection-related mortality and frequency of febrile neutropenia, was very low, due to the low number of patients evaluated (high imprecision) and the high risk of bias.There was no evidence of a difference in terms of median survival time in the trial comparing GM-CSF and antibiotics. Two-year survival times were 6% (0 to 12%) in both arms (high imprecision, low quality of evidence). There were four toxic deaths in the GM-CSF arm and three in the antibiotics arm (3.8%), without evidence of a difference (RR 1.32; 95% CI 0.30 to 5.69; P = 0.71; low quality of evidence). There were 28% grade III or IV infections in the GM-CSF arm and 18% in the antibiotics arm, without any evidence of a difference (RR 1.55; 95% CI 0.86 to 2.80; P = 0.15, low quality of evidence). There were 5 episodes out of 360 cycles of grade IV infections in the GM-CSF arm and 3 episodes out of 334 cycles in the cotrimoxazole arm (0.8%), with no evidence of a difference (RR 1.55; 95% CI 0.37 to 6.42; P = 0.55; low quality of evidence). There was no significant difference between the two arms for non-haematological toxicities like diarrhoea, stomatitis, infections, neurologic, respiratory, or cardiac adverse events. Grade III and IV thrombopenia occurred significantly more frequently in the GM-CSF arm (60.8%) compared to the antibiotics arm (28.9%); (RR 2.10; 95% CI 1.41 to 3.12; P = 0.0002; low quality of evidence). Neither infection-related mortality, incidence of febrile neutropenia, nor quality of life were reported in this trial.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

As we only found two small trials with 195 patients altogether, no conclusion for clinical practice is possible. More trials are necessary to assess the benefits and harms of G(M)-CSF compared to antibiotics for infection prevention in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy.

Anti-infective prophylaxis in pediatric patients with acute myeloid leukemia

Pediatric patients undergoing treatment for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) are at high risk for infectious complications, predominantly due to Gram-negative bacteria, viridans group streptococci and fungal pathogens. In order to prevent infections in these patients, most institutions have implemented a number of non-pharmacological approaches to supportive care. In addition, antibiotic prophylaxis reduces bacterial infection, but may increase the emergence of resistance. Antifungal prophylaxis is generally recommended for children with AML. Whereas the use of hematopoietic growth factors has not resulted in improved survival, the efficacy of prophylactic granulocyte transfusions has to be determined.

Effect of levofloxacin prophylaxis for prevention of severe infections in multiple myeloma patients receiving bortezomib-containing regimens

Fluoroquinolone is recommended as a prophylactic antibiotic for high-risk patients with profound neutropenia. We previously reported that multiple myeloma (MM) patients who received bortezomib-based regimens were at higher risk of severe infections (30.9%) associated with lymphocytopenia. In the study, we evaluated whether severe infectious complications can be prevented by prophylactic administration of oral levofloxacin in MM patients treated with bortezomib-based regimens. A total of 80 patients received oral levofloxacin 500 mg daily during the median four cycles of treatment. The prophylactic group (n = 80) with levofloxacin showed significantly decreased severe infections compared to a historical control group (n = 139) without levofloxacin prophylaxis during treatment of bortezomib-based regimens (17.5 vs. 30.9%, P = 0.037). In the prophylactic group, two patients (2.5%) died of pneumonia and septic shock. Four patients (5%) stopped levofloxacin due to side effects that consisted of gastrointestinal discomfort (2.5%), itching sense (1.25%), and QTc prolongation (1.25%). In conclusion, prophylaxis with levofloxacin may be effective in the prevention of severe infection in MM patients receiving bortezomib-based regimens. A prospective randomized study is needed to test the prophylactic effect of levofloxacin in MM patients treated with bortezomib-based regimens.

Moderate-dose cyclophosphamide for severe aplastic anemia has significant toxicity and does not prevent relapse and clonal evolution

First-line therapy of severe aplastic anemia (SAA) with high-dose cyclophosphamide causes toxicity and increased short-term mortality. We investigated cyclophosphamide at a lower, more moderate dose in combination with aggressive supportive care to determine whether severe infections might be avoided and hematologic outcomes defined for this regimen. From 2010 to 2012, 22 patients received cyclophosphamide at 120 mg/kg plus cyclosporine and antibacterial, antiviral, and antifungal prophylaxis. Toxicity was considerable, mainly due to prolonged absolute neutropenia, which occurred regardless of pretherapy blood counts, and persisted an average of 2 months. Granulocyte transfusions for uncontrolled infection were required in 5 patients, confirmed fungal infections were documented in 6, and 9 patients died. Nine patients (41%) responded at 6 months. After a median follow-up of 2.2 years, relapse occurred in 2 patients, and cytogenetic abnormalities (including monosomy 7) were observed in 4 patients. Although cyclophosphamide has activity in SAA, its toxicity is not justified when far less dangerous alternatives are available. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01193283.

Ambulatory consolidation chemotherapy for acute myeloid leukemia with antibacterial prophylaxis is associated with frequent bacteremia and the emergence of fluoroquinolone resistant E. Coli

BACKGROUND

Ambulatory consolidation chemotherapy for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is frequently associated with bloodstream infections but the spectrum of bacterial pathogens in this setting has not been well-described.

METHODS

We evaluated the emergence of bacteremias and their respective antibiotic susceptibility patterns in AML patients receiving ambulatory-based consolidation therapy. Following achievement of complete remission, 207 patients received the first cycle (C1), and 195 the second cycle (C2), of consolidation on an ambulatory basis. Antimicrobial prophylaxis consisted of ciprofloxacin, amoxicillin and fluconazole.

RESULTS

There were significantly more positive blood cultures for E. coli in C2 as compared to C1 (10 vs. 1, p=0.0045); all E. coli strains for which susceptibility testing was performed demonstrated resistance to ciprofloxacin. In patients under age 60 there was a significantly higher rate of Streptococccus spp. bacteremia in C2 vs. C1; despite amoxicillin prophylaxis all Streptococcus isolates in C2 were sensitive to penicillin. Patients with Staphylococcus bacteremia in C1 had significantly higher rates of Staphylococcus bacteremia in C2 (p=0.009, OR=8.6).

CONCLUSIONS

For AML patients undergoing outpatient-based intensive consolidation chemotherapy with antibiotic prophylaxis, the second cycle is associated with higher rates of ciprofloxacin resistant E. coli, penicillin-sensitive Streptococcus bacteremias and recurrent Staphylococcus infections.

Primary prophylaxis of bacterial infections and Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia in patients with hematological malignancies and solid tumors : guidelines of the Infectious Diseases Working Party (AGIHO) of the German Society of Hematology and Oncology (DGHO)

Bacterial infections are the most common cause for treatment-related mortality in patients with neutropenia after chemotherapy. Here, we discuss the use of antibacterial prophylaxis against bacteria and Pneumocystis pneumonia (PCP) in neutropenic cancer patients and offer guidance towards the choice of drug. A literature search was performed to screen all articles published between September 2000 and January 2012 on antibiotic prophylaxis in neutropenic cancer patients. The authors assembled original reports and meta-analysis from the literature and drew conclusions, which were discussed and approved in a consensus conference of the Infectious Disease Working Party of the German Society of Hematology and Oncology (AGIHO). Antibacterial prophylaxis has led to a reduction of febrile events and infections. A significant reduction of overall mortality could only be shown in a meta-analysis. Fluoroquinolones are preferred for antibacterial and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole for PCP prophylaxis. Due to serious concerns about an increase of resistant pathogens, only patients at high risk of severe infections should be considered for antibiotic prophylaxis. Risk factors of individual patients and local resistance patterns must be taken into account. Risk factors, choice of drug for antibacterial and PCP prophylaxis and concerns regarding the use of prophylactic antibiotics are discussed in the review.

Antimicrobial prophylaxis and outpatient management of fever and neutropenia in adults treated for malignancy: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline

PURPOSE

To provide guidelines on antimicrobial prophylaxis for adult neutropenic oncology outpatients and on selection and treatment as outpatients of those with fever and neutropenia.

METHODS

A literature search identified relevant studies published in English. Primary outcomes included: development of fever and/or infections in afebrile neutropenic outpatients and recovery without complications and overall mortality in febrile neutropenic outpatients. Secondary outcomes included: in afebrile neutropenic outpatients, infection-related mortality; in outpatients with fever and neutropenia, defervescence without regimen change, time to defervescence, infectious complications, and recurrent fever; and in both groups, hospital admissions, duration, and adverse effects of antimicrobials. An Expert Panel developed guidelines based on extracted data and informal consensus.

RESULTS

Forty-seven articles from 43 studies met selection criteria.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Antibacterial and antifungal prophylaxis are only recommended for patients expected to have < 100 neutrophils/μL for > 7 days, unless other factors increase risks for complications or mortality to similar levels. Inpatient treatment is standard to manage febrile neutropenic episodes, although carefully selected patients may be managed as outpatients after systematic assessment beginning with a validated risk index (eg, Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer [MASCC] score or Talcott's rules). Patients with MASCC scores ≥ 21 or in Talcott group 4, and without other risk factors, can be managed safely as outpatients. Febrile neutropenic patients should receive initial doses of empirical antibacterial therapy within an hour of triage and should either be monitored for at least 4 hours to determine suitability for outpatient management or be admitted to the hospital. An oral fluoroquinolone plus amoxicillin/clavulanate (or plus clindamycin if penicillin allergic) is recommended as empiric therapy, unless fluoroquinolone prophylaxis was used before fever developed.

Evaluation and Management of Bacterial and Fungal Infections Occurring in Patients with a Hematological Malignancy: A 2011 Update

Patients with a hematological malignancy are a heterogeneous patient population who are afflicted with diseases that range from rapidly fatal acute leukemia to indolent lymphoma or chronic leukemia. Treatment options for these patients range from observation to hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), but all patients are more susceptible to infection. The problem of infection is dynamic with continued shifts in pathogenic organisms and microbial susceptibilities, new treatment regimens that further diminish immune function, and patients receiving treatment who are now older and frailer. The classic patterns of immunodeficiency for patients with a hematological malignancy include: periods of profound neutropenia, increased iatrogenic risks (i.e., central vascular catheters), and cellular immune suppression that affects HSCT recipients, patients with lymphoid malignancies, and those receiving treatment with corticosteroids or agents like alemtuzumab [1–4]. Recent advances in antimicrobial drug development, new technology, clinical trial results, and further clinical experience have enhanced the database on which to make infection prophylaxis and treatment decisions. However, the practicing clinician must remember that the majority of basic infection management principles for patients who are neutropenic remain unchanged.

Resistance surveillance studies: a multifaceted problem--the fluoroquinolone example

INTRODUCTION

This review summarizes data on the fluoroquinolone resistance epidemiology published in the previous 5 years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The data reviewed are stratified according to the different prescription patterns by either primary- or tertiary-care givers and by indication. Global surveillance studies demonstrate that fluoroquinolone- resistance rates increased in the past several years in almost all bacterial species except Staphylococcus pneumoniae and Haemophilus influenzae causing community-acquired respiratory tract infections (CARTIs), as well as Enterobacteriaceae causing community-acquired urinary tract infections. Geographically and quantitatively varying fluoroquinolone resistance rates were recorded among Gram-positive and Gram-negative pathogens causing healthcare-associated respiratory tract infections. One- to two-thirds of Enterobacteriaceae producing extended-spectrum β-lactamases (ESBLs) were fluoroquinolone resistant too, thus, limiting the fluoroquinolone use in the treatment of community- as well as healthcare-acquired urinary tract and intra-abdominal infections. The remaining ESBL-producing or plasmid-mediated quinolone resistance mechanisms harboring Enterobacteriaceae were low-level quinolone resistant. Furthermore, 10-30 % of H. influenzae and S. pneumoniae causing CARTIs harbored first-step quinolone resistance determining region (QRDR) mutations. These mutants pass susceptibility testing unnoticed and are primed to acquire high-level fluoroquinolone resistance rapidly, thus, putting the patient at risk. The continued increase in fluoroquinolone resistance affects patient management and necessitates changes in some current guidelines for the treatment of intra-abdominal infections or even precludes the use of fluoroquinolones in certain indications like gonorrhea and pelvic inflammatory diseases in those geographic areas in which fluoroquinolone resistance rates and/or ESBL production is high. Fluoroquinolone resistance has been selected among the commensal flora colonizing the gut, nose, oropharynx, and skin, so that horizontal gene transfer between the commensal flora and the offending pathogen as well as inter- and intraspecies recombinations contribute to the emergence and spread of fluoroquinolone resistance among pathogenic streptococci. Although interspecies recombinations are not yet the major cause for the emergence of fluoroquinolone resistance, its existence indicates that a large reservoir of fluoroquinolone resistance exists. Thus, a scenario resembling that of a worldwide spread of β-lactam resistance in pneumococci is conceivable. However, many resistance surveillance studies suffer from inaccuracies like the sampling of a selected patient population, restricted geographical sampling, and undefined requirements of the user, so that the results are biased. The number of national centers is most often limited with one to two participating laboratories, so that such studies are point prevalence but not surveillance studies. Selected samples are analyzed predominantly as either hospitalized patients or patients at risk or those in whom therapy failed are sampled; however, fluoroquinolones are most frequently prescribed by the general practitioner. Selected sampling results in a significant over-estimation of fluoroquinolone resistance in outpatients. Furthermore, the requirements of the users are often not met; the prescribing physician, the microbiologist, the infection control specialist, public health and regulatory authorities, and the pharmaceutical industry have diverse interests, which, however, are not addressed by different designs of a surveillance study. Tools should be developed to provide customer-specific datasets.

CONCLUSION

Consequently, most surveillance studies suffer from well recognized but uncorrected biases or inaccuracies. Nevertheless, they provide important information that allows the identification of trends in pathogen incidence and antimicrobial resistance.

Antibiotic prophylaxis for bacterial infections in afebrile neutropenic patients following chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Bacterial infections are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients who are neutropenic following chemotherapy for malignancy. Trials have shown the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis in reducing the incidence of bacterial infections but not in reducing mortality rates. Our systematic review from 2006 also showed a reduction in mortality.

OBJECTIVES

This updated review aimed to evaluate whether there is still a benefit of reduction in mortality when compared to placebo or no intervention.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Cancer Network Register of Trials (2011), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2011), MEDLINE (1966 to March 2011), EMBASE (1980 to March 2011), abstracts of conference proceedings and the references of identified studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs comparing different types of antibiotic prophylaxis with placebo or no intervention, or another antibiotic, to prevent bacterial infections in afebrile neutropenic patients.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently appraised the quality of each trial and extracted data from the included trials. Analyses were performed using RevMan 5.1 software.

MAIN RESULTS

One-hundred and nine trials (involving 13,579 patients) that were conducted between the years 1973 to 2010 met the inclusion criteria. When compared with placebo or no intervention, antibiotic prophylaxis significantly reduced the risk of death from all causes (46 trials, 5635 participants; risk ratio (RR) 0.66, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.79) and the risk of infection-related death (43 trials, 5777 participants; RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.77). The estimated number needed to treat (NNT) to prevent one death was 34 (all-cause mortality) and 48 (infection-related mortality).Prophylaxis also significantly reduced the occurrence of fever (54 trials, 6658 participants; RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.87), clinically documented infection (48 trials, 5758 participants; RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.76), microbiologically documented infection (53 trials, 6383 participants; RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.62) and other indicators of infection.There were no significant differences between quinolone prophylaxis and TMP-SMZ prophylaxis with regard to death from all causes or infection, however, quinolone prophylaxis was associated with fewer side effects leading to discontinuation (seven trials, 850 participants; RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.87) and less resistance to the drugs thereafter (six trials, 366 participants; RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.74).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Antibiotic prophylaxis in afebrile neutropenic patients significantly reduced all-cause mortality. In our review, the most significant reduction in mortality was observed in trials assessing prophylaxis with quinolones. The benefits of antibiotic prophylaxis outweighed the harm such as adverse effects and the development of resistance since all-cause mortality was reduced. As most trials in our review were of patients with haematologic cancer, we strongly recommend antibiotic prophylaxis for these patients, preferably with a quinolone. Prophylaxis may also be considered for patients with solid tumours or lymphoma.

Infections in Leukemia and Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation

Infections are one of the most common complications in patients diagnosed with leukemia and serve as a major obstacle to treatment. Through the early 1970s, infections were the most common cause of death in patients diagnosed with acute leukemia, but improvement in treatment and supportive care over the past few decades, coupled with expanded prophylaxis and prevention regimens, have led to reduction in both the frequency and severity of infections. Regardless, due in part to an aging cancer population and the diversity of cancer treatments and procedures, infectious diseases remain a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with leukemia.

Role of prophylactic antibiotics in the prevention of infections after chemotherapy: a literature review

Febrile neutropenia is a serious sequel of chemotherapy and can result in significant morbidity and mortality. The use of prophylactic antibiotics during neutropenia to reduce this complication has been widely investigated. Historical trials that tested a variety of approaches were generally small and reported mixed results. Because of the lack of compelling evidence and concerns over emergence of resistance, international guidance has continued to recommend against the routine use of antibiotic prophylaxis in this setting. The 2 recently published, large, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of levofloxacin versus placebo have challenged the reluctance to adopt the policy of prophylaxis. The GIMEMA trial focused on patients receiving high-dose inpatient chemotherapy for hematologic and solid tumors. Levofloxacin prophylaxis significantly reduced febrile episodes and microbiologically documented infection and bacteremia. In contrast, the SIGNIFICANT trial randomized patients receiving cyclic, outpatient, standard-dose chemotherapy for a variety of solid tumors and lymphoma. Significant reductions in febrile neutropenia episodes and hospitalization for the treatment of infection were demonstrated with prophylaxis. A recent metaanalysis has conclusively demonstrated a reduction in mortality resulting from the use of prophylactic fluoroquinolones for the duration of neutropenia in patients with acute leukemia and after high-dose chemotherapy, and for the first cycle of standard-dose chemotherapy in patients with solid tumors and lymphomas. An inevitable consequence of antibiotic use is the development of resistance. Although there is no doubt this can occur in individual patients and in treatment centers using fluoroquinolone prophylaxis, there is little evidence that patients are harmed as a result. Nevertheless, the induction of bacterial resistance should be avoided in principle, and more work is needed to limit prescribing of antibacterial agents to situations supported by a secure evidence base. When a secure evidence base exists, as is the case now for prophylaxis after chemotherapy, further work is needed to identify subgroups of patients who benefit most from prophylaxis so that it can be applied rationally and efficiently.

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.

Decreased incidence of febrile episodes with antibiotic prophylaxis in the treatment of decitabine for myelodysplastic syndrome

We analyzed the role of antibiotic prophylaxis during decitabine treatment for MDS. The primary endpoint was the incidence of febrile episodes. The total number of decitabine cycles given to 28 patients was 131, and febrile episodes occurred in 15 cycles (11.5%). Antibiotic prophylaxis was orally administered in 95 cycles (72.5%). Febrile episodes were significantly less frequent among patients who received antibiotic prophylaxis (7.4%) than in those without prophylaxis (22.2%) (P=0.017). In conclusion, antibiotic prophylaxis reduced the incidence of febrile episodes in patients who received decitabine treatment for MDS, especially at earlier cycles and in the presence of severe cytopenia.

Prophylactic antibiotics or G-CSF for the prevention of infections and improvement of survival in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Febrile neutropenia (FN) and other infectious complications are some of the most serious treatment-related toxicities of chemotherapy for cancer, with a mortality rate of 2% to 21%. The two main types of prophylactic regimens are granulocyte (G-CSF) or granulocyte-macrophage colony stimulating factors (GM-CSF); and antibiotics, frequently quinolones or cotrimoxazole. Important current guidelines recommend the use of colony stimulating factors when the risk of febrile neutropenia is above 20% but they do not mention the use of antibiotics. However, both regimens have been shown to reduce the incidence of infections. Since no systematic review has compared the two regimens, a systematic review was undertaken.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness of G-CSF or GM-CSF with antibiotics in cancer patients receiving myeloablative chemotherapy with respect to preventing fever, febrile neutropenia, infection, infection-related mortality, early mortality and improving quality of life.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, databases of ongoing trials, and conference proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the American Society of Hematology (1980 to 2007). We planned to include both full-text and abstract publications.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing prophylaxis with G-CSF or GM-CSF versus antibiotics in cancer patients of all ages receiving chemotherapy or bone marrow or stem cell transplantation were included for review. Both study arms had to receive identical chemotherapy regimes and other supportive care.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Trial eligibility and quality assessment, data extraction and analysis were done in duplicate. Authors were contacted to obtain missing data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included two eligible randomised controlled trials with 195 patients. Due to differences in the outcomes reported, the trials could not be pooled for meta-analysis. Both trials showed non-significant results favouring antibiotics for the prevention of fever or hospitalisation for febrile neutropenia.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence for or against antibiotics compared to G(M)-CSFs for the prevention of infections in cancer patients.

[Management of 315neutropenic febrile episodes in a cancer center]

Management of febrile neutropenic patients is described in guidelines. Each cancer center can adapt these according to its local bacterial ecology. We present a retrospective study made in a cancer center from 2001 to 2003.

METHOD

Three hundred and fifteen febrile neutropenic episodes after chemotherapy (66% for solid tumor) were analysed.

RESULTS

For 279 episodes, no antibiotic therapy was given before admission. Clinical or radiological manifestations occurred in 46%; microbiologically documented infections by hemocultures in 28% (Gram positive: 42%; Gram negative: 51%) and by puncture in 14% (Gram negative: 58%). The length of pyrexia was inferior to 7 days in 88% and neutropenia inferior 7 days in 80.8%. 79.7% of episodes were treated with one of the three antibiotic therapy recommended by the center (ceftriaxone+tobramycin; ceftriaxone+ciprofloxacin; ceftriaxone+ofloxacin); 13.3% were treated with an other therapy; 7% received no antibiotic therapy. 68.5% of patients treated with one of the three antibiotic therapies, became afebrile without changing the antibiotic protocol.

CONCLUSION

In our study, there were a majority of Gram negative bacteria except for Pseudomonas aeruginosa. The three antibiotic therapy recommended by the center (third generation cephalosporin+aminoglycosides or fluoroquinolones) were effective and glycopeptide was not necessary in first intention treatment.

Bloodstream infections: evolution and trends in the microbiology workload, incidence, and etiology, 1985-2006

Information available on bloodstream infection (BSI) is usually restricted to short periods of time, certain clinical backgrounds, or specific pathogens, or is just outdated. We conducted the current prospective study of patients with BSI in a 1750-bed teaching hospital to evaluate workload trends and the incidence and etiology of BSI in a general hospital during the last 22 years, including the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) era. The main outcome measures were laboratory workload, trends in incidence per 1000 admissions and per 100,000 population of different microorganisms, and the impact of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) epidemic in the period 1985-2006.From 1985 to 2006 we had 27,419 episodes of significant BSI (22,626 patients). BSI incidence evolved from 16.0 episodes to 31.2/1000 admissions showing an annual increase of 0.83 episodes/1000 admissions (95% confidence interval, 0.61-1.05; p < 0.0001). The evolution of the incidence per 1000 admissions and per 100,000 population of different groups of microorganisms was as follows: Gram positives 8.2 to 15.7/1000 admissions and 66.8 to 138.3/100,000 population; Gram negatives 7.8 to 16.2/1000 admissions and 63.5 to 141.9/100,000 population; anaerobes 0.5 to 1.3/1000 admissions and 4.1 to 11.7/100,000 population; and fungi 0.2 to 1.5/1000 admissions and 1.7 to 12.5/100,000 population. All those differences were statistically significant. We observed the emergence of multiresistant Gram-positive and Gram-negative microorganisms. At least 2484 episodes of BSI (9.1%) occurred in 1822 patients infected with HIV. The incidence of BSI in HIV-infected patients increased from 1985 and reached a peak in 1995 (17.6% of BSI). Since 1995, the decrease was continuous, and in 2006 only 3.9% of all BSI episodes occurred in HIV-positive patients in our institution. We conclude that the BSI workload has increased in modern microbiology laboratories. Gram-positive pathogens have overtaken other etiologic agents of BSI. Our observation shows the remarkable escalation of some resistant pathogens, and the rise and relative fall of BSI in patients with HIV.

Decreasing the incidence and impact of infections in neutropenic patients: evidence from meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

[corrected] Neutropenia is a common complication of intensive chemotherapy in patients with solid organ or hematologic malignancies that is associated with a high risk for life-threatening infections. Many interventions have been employed in order to limit the incidence of these infections or to treat them when the prophylactic measures fail.

SCOPE

The commonest characteristic of the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) conducted on this issue was the small sample size. In addition, if RCTs studying the prophylactic interventions were excluded, the aim of most of the rest of relevant RCTs was to prove the equal effectiveness of the tested interventions in terms of treatment success. We searched PubMed and Cochrane database to identify meta-analyses of RCTs in the field of febrile neutropenia.

RESULTS

The most prominent findings of these meta-analyses were the promising effect, although based on open label RCTs, of antimicrobial prophylaxis with fluoroquinolones on the mortality of all neutropenic patients and the beneficial effect of antifungal prophylaxis on mortality of neutropenic patients with allogeneic hematopoetic stem cell transplantation. Another noteworthy finding was the higher mortality associated with empiric cefepime treatment when compared with other beta-lactams. In other cases, the findings of the published meta-analyses either confirmed or consolidated the results of individual RCTs.

CONCLUSION

Meta-analyses are very useful for obtaining a better overview and to provide some general qualitative and quantitative conclusions, but are not always a substitute for appropriately powered, well-designed RCTs. In addition, the reported findings should be interpreted with caution taking into account the limitations of various methodological aspects of meta-analysis in general, as well as the limitations of the individual meta-analyses in this field.

Levofloxacin vs. ciprofloxacin plus phenethicillin for the prevention of bacterial infections in patients with haematological malignancies

An open-label randomised clinical trial was designed to compare the efficacy and tolerance of levofloxacin and ciprofloxacin plus phenethicillin for the prevention of bacterial infections in patients with high-risk neutropenia, and to monitor the emergence of antimicrobial resistance. Adult patients (n = 242) scheduled to receive intensive treatment for haematological malignancies were assigned randomly to receive oral prophylaxis with either levofloxacin 500 mg once-daily (n = 122), or ciprofloxacin 500 mg twice-daily plus phenethicillin 250 mg four-times-daily (n = 120). The primary endpoint was failure of prophylaxis, defined as the first occurrence of either the need to change the prophylactic regimen or the initiation of intravenous broad-spectrum antibiotics. This endpoint was observed in 89 (73.0%) of 122 levofloxacin recipients and in 85 (70.8%) of 120 ciprofloxacin plus phenethicillin recipients (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.88-1.21, p 0.71). No differences were noted between the two groups with respect to secondary outcome measures, including time to endpoint, occurrence of fever, type and number of microbiologically documented infections, and administration of intravenous antibiotics. A questionnaire revealed that levofloxacin was tolerated significantly better than ciprofloxacin plus phenethicillin. Surveillance cultures indicated the emergence of viridans group (VG) streptococci resistant to levofloxacin in 17 (14%) of 122 levofloxacin recipients; in these cases, the prophylactic regimen was adjusted. No bacteraemia with VG streptococci occurred. It was concluded that levofloxacin and ciprofloxacin plus phenethicillin are equally effective in the prevention of bacterial infections in neutropenic patients, but that levofloxacin is tolerated better. Emergence of levofloxacin-resistant VG streptococci is of concern, but appears to be a manageable problem.

Putting Evidence Into Practice: Prevention of Infection

The prevention of infection is an important outcome to measure in patients with cancer because infectious complications are a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. Nurses play a vital role in the prevention of infection in patients with cancer through nursing practice, research, and patient education. However, many common nursing interventions to prevent infection are based on tradition or expert opinion and have not been subjected to scientific examination. The 2005 Oncology Nursing Society Prevention of Infection Outcomes Intervention Project Team reviewed, critiqued, and summarized the research evidence for nursing interventions to prevent infections in patients with cancer. Pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic interventions were included because many advanced practice nurses prescribe medications. This article is an evidence-based review of nursing interventions to prevent infection in patients with cancer.

Febrile neutropenia: highlighting the role of prophylactic antibiotics and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor during standard dose chemotherapy for solid tumors

The prevention of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia is important as it reduces hospitalization and is likely to improve quality of life. Several prophylactic strategies are available, although their use in patients with an anticipated short duration of neutropenia is controversial and not recommended. This paper presents the results of a review of the literature on the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of prophylactic antibiotics and/or granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, and also discusses the recommendations in current guidelines in view of recent publications. Both primary prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor and prophylactic antibiotics reduce the risk of febrile neutropenia considerably, and the addition of prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor to antibiotics is even more effective. As antibiotics, however, give rise to antimicrobial resistance and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor is expensive, tailoring of prophylaxis is clearly needed. This will increase the absolute clinical and economical benefits of prophylaxis. Patient-related, treatment-related and disease-related factors enhancing the risk of febrile neutropenia are discussed, including the, underrated, high risk of febrile neutropenia specifically in the first cycles of chemotherapy. Half of the patients developing febrile neutropenia during treatment do so in the first cycle of chemotherapy, which favors primary prophylaxis. The efficacy of secondary prophylaxis is not well documented. Finally, new interesting agents in the treatment and supportive care of solid tumors have become available, and these are discussed in relation to the incidence and prevention of febrile neutropenia.

Approach to the complications of treatment for acute leukemia in the elderly

Acute leukemia is common in the elderly and, due to the aging population and poorer prognosis, represents a major challenge. Elderly acute leukemia patients have been arbitrarily defined as >or=55 to 65 years of age and are underrepresented in clinical trials. There are physiologic differences between elderly and non-elderly patients. A comprehensive understanding of these differences allows the development of a systematic approach to assessing the risks for treatment-related complications. Use of a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA), initially developed and validated in the general geriatric population, may allow more accurate assessment of the likelihood of chemotherapy-induced complications and allow for proactive risk minimization. Once complications to therapy develop, aggressive treatment is essential. Treatment related to common complications that arise from therapy will be reviewed. Further research directed at this population is required.

Acute Radiation Injury: Contingency Planning for Triage, Supportive Care, and Transplantation

Evaluation and management of victims of exposure to myelosuppressive radiation in a military, terrorist, or accidental event is challenging. The hematopoietic syndrome with marrow suppression and pancytopenia follows intermediate intensity radiation exposure and as such produces a clinical syndrome similar to that after myelosuppressive chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation. Therefore, hematologists, oncologists, and transplantation physicians have the opportunity and challenge to plan for care of irradiation victims. Management of the hematopoietic syndrome, as a component of acute radiation sickness, requires understanding its manifestations and implementation of clinical biodosimetry to provide appropriate therapeutic support. Hematopoietic growth factors may be of value if administered early as a component of supportive care. Planning for urgent stem cell transplantation for those with intermediate- to high-dose radiation (4-10 Gy) may be required. Establishing contingency plans for triage, assessment, supportive care, and treatment resembles the development of phase II trials, with defined eligibilities, treatment plans, and incorporated data collection to assess results and plan further improvements in care. The hematology/oncology community is most suited to participate in such contingency planning, and the necessary elements for its success are reviewed.

Management of the febrile neutropenic cancer patient: lessons from 40 years of study

Almost forty years ago the relationship between the circulating neutrophil count and the risk of pyogenic infection was established. Since that time, through the vehicle of clinical trials, much has been learnt about the etiologies, risk factors, pathogenesis, and natural history of first and subsequent febrile neutropenic episodes. Refinements to the empirical antibacterial management has reduced infection-related mortality to less than 10 percent. Algorithmic approaches to persistent fever in the setting of severe neutropenia have been developed. Circumstances wherein preventative strategies are most efficacious have been defined. Clinicians have learned that neutropenic patients comprise a heterogeneous population that does not encounter the same risks for infection-related morbidity and mortality. Tailored stratified approaches to management of the febrile neutropenic patient have been developed that are safe and cost-effective.

Infectious Complications of Cancer Therapy

Advances in the management of cancer, particularly the development of new chemotherapeutic agents, have greatly improved the survival and outcome of patients with hematologic malignancies and solid tumors; overall 5-year survival rates in cancer patients have improved from 39% in the 1960s to 60% in the 1990s.1 However, infection, caused by both the underlying malignancy and cancer chemotherapy, particularly myelosuppressive chemotherapy, remains a persistent challenge.

Antibiotic prophylaxis in chemotherapy-induced neutropenia: time to reconsider

The use of antibiotic prophylaxis in neutropenic patients remains controversial. The main arguments against prophylaxis are the lack of survival benefit and the risk of inducing antibiotic resistance. At present, clinical guidelines advise against routine use of antibiotic prophylaxis and current practice is to commence broad-spectrum antibiotics at the onset of fever in the neutropenic patient. However hospitalization, investigations and treatment all impact on resources as well as affecting patient quality of life, often resulting in chemotherapy delays and dose reductions. The benefits of prophylactic antibiotics have been emphasized by two major double-blind, placebo controlled trials with levofloxacin with very significant reductions in all infection-related events. Furthermore, the meta-analysis confirms a survival advantage and this is greatest with the use of fluoroquinolones. These benefits must be weighed against the problem of emerging antibiotic resistance. It has been shown that antibiotic prophylaxis does induce resistant organisms, but some studies have shown that the impact on clinical outcomes may not be as great as expected. Current evidence supports antibiotic prophylaxis with fluoroquinolones in acute leukaemia and high-dose chemotherapy patients, commencing at the same time as chemotherapy. Febrile episodes are much commoner with the first cycle in patients with solid tumours or lymphoma having moderately myelosuppressive chemotherapy, and these patients should be offered prophylaxis for at least the first cycle of chemotherapy. Further work is ongoing to facilitate the selection of patients with the greatest chance of benefit so that prophylaxis can be used efficiently.

Prevention of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia by prophylactic antibiotics plus or minus granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in small-cell lung cancer: a Dutch Randomized Phase III Study

PURPOSE

Febrile neutropenia (FN) is a major complication of chemotherapy. Antibiotics as well as granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) are effective in preventing FN. This multicenter randomized phase III trial determines whether the addition of G-CSF to antibiotic prophylaxis can further reduce the incidence of FN in patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) at the risk of FN.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients (N = 175) were stratified for stage of disease, performance status, age, and prior chemotherapy treatment, and were randomly assigned for treatment with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and etoposide (CDE), followed by prophylactic antibiotics alone (ciprofloxacin and roxithromycin) or by antibiotics in combination with G-CSF on days 4 to 13.

RESULTS

In cycle 1, 20 patients (24%) in the antibiotics group developed FN compared with nine patients (10%) in the antibiotics plus G-CSF group (P = .01). In cycles 2 to 5, the incidences of FN were practically the same in both groups (17% v 11%). Only the treatment parameters (odds ratio, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.14 to 0.78) and age (1.067 per year; 95% CI, 1.013 to 1.0124) were related to the probability of FN in cycle 1.

CONCLUSION

Primary G-CSF prophylaxis added to primary antibiotic prophylaxis is effective in reducing FN and infections in SCLC patients at the risk of FN with the first cycle of CDE chemotherapy. For patients with similar risk of FN, the combined use of prophylactic antibiotics plus G-CSF can be considered, specifically in the first cycle of chemotherapy.

Neutropenia febril: pasado, presente y futuro

The present review aims to provide an overall view of the changes that have occurred in the last 40 years in the etiological agents isolated in febrile neutropenic patients, as well as in their antibacterial susceptibility patterns and their involvement in empirical treatment regimes. This overall view allows us to observe how the modifications introduced in the treatment of these patients has been accompanied by continual changes in the causative microorganisms, which in turn has required treatment regimens to be redesigned. Because of these constant changes, the significant advances achieved in diagnostic techniques and the recognition of subpopulations of patients with distinct degrees of morbidity and mortality, specialists in the various fields involved in the management of febrile neutropenic patients must constantly update their knowledge.

Medical management of radiological casualties

Victims of radiological terrorism events require prompt diagnosis and treatment of medical and surgical conditions as well as conditions related to radiation exposure. Hospital emergency personnel should triage victims using traditional medical and trauma criteria. Radiation dose can be estimated early post-event using rapid-sort, automated biodosimetry and clinical parameters such as the clinical history, the time to emesis (TE), and lymphocyte depletion kinetics. For TE < 2 h, the effective whole-body dose is at least 3 Gy. If TE < 1 h, the whole-body dose most probably exceeds 4 Gy. Lymphocyte depletion follows dose-dependent, first order kinetics after high-level gamma and criticality incidents. Patient radiation dose can be estimated very effectively from the medical history, serial lymphocyte counts, and TE, and subsequently confirmed with chromosome-aberration bioassay, the current gold standard. These data are effectively analyzed using the Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute Biodosimetry Assessment Tool. The medical management of patients with acute, moderate to severe radiation exposure (effective whole-body dose >3 Gy) should emphasize the rapid administration of colony stimulating factors. All of these compounds decrease the duration of radiation-induced neutropenia and stimulate neutrophil recovery, albeit with some variability, in patients who have received myelotoxic chemotherapy, and all have demonstrated benefit in irradiated animals. For those patients developing febrile radiation-induced neutropenia, adherence to the current Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines for high-risk neutropenia is recommended.

Antibiotic prophylaxis for bacterial infections in afebrile neutropenic patients following chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Bacterial infections are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in neutropenic patients following chemotherapy for malignancy. Trials have shown the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis in decreasing the incidence of bacterial infections, but not in reducing mortality rates.

OBJECTIVES

This review aimed to evaluate whether antibiotic prophylaxis in afebrile neutropenic patients reduced mortality when compared to placebo or no intervention.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Electronic searches on The Cochrane Cancer Network Register of Trials (2004), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 4, 2004), MEDLINE (1966 to 2004) and EMBASE (1980 to 2004) and abstracts of conference proceedings; references of identified studies; the first author of each included trial was contacted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs or quasi-RCTs comparing different types of antibiotic prophylaxis with placebo or no intervention, or another antibiotic to prevent bacterial infections in afebrile neutropenic patients.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently appraised the quality of each trial and extracted data from the included trials. Relative risks (RR) or average differences, with their 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated.

MAIN RESULTS

One hundred trials (10,274 patients) performed between the years 1973 to 2004 met inclusion criteria. Antibiotic prophylaxis significantly decreased the risk for death when compared with placebo or no intervention (RR, 0.66 [95% CI 0.54 to 0.81]). The authors estimated the number needed to treat (NNT) in order to prevent 1 death from all causes as 60 (95% CI 34 to 268). Prophylaxis resulted in a significant decrease in the risk of infection-related death, RR 0.58 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.74) and in the occurrence of fever, RR 0.78 (95% CI 0.75 to 0.82). A reduction in mortality was also evident when the more recently conducted quinolone trials were analysed separately. Quinolone prophylaxis reduced the risk for all-cause mortality, RR 0.52 (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.84).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review demonstrated that prophylaxis significantly reduced all-cause mortality. The most significant reduction in mortality was observed in trials assessing prophylaxis with quinolones. The benefit demonstrated in our review outweighs harm, such as adverse effects, and development of resistance, since all-cause mortality is reduced. Since most trials in our review were of patients with haematologic cancer, prophylaxis, preferably with a quinolone, should be considered for these patients.