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.

Daptomycin vs. glycopeptides in the treatment of febrile neutropenia: results of the Izmir matched cohort study

PURPOSE

In this multicentre, retrospective, matched cohort study we aimed to evaluate the outcomes of neutropenic fever cases that were treated with daptomycin or a glycopeptide (vancomycin or teicoplanin).

METHODS

Data and outcomes of adult (aged > 18-years old) patients with neutropenic fever [(1) without clinical and radiological evidence of pneumonia, (2) who were treated with daptomycin or a glycopeptide (teicoplanin or vancomycin) for any reason and for at least 72 h] were extracted from the hospital databases. Matching was performed with all of the three following criteria: (1) underlying disease, (2) reason for starting daptomycin or glycopeptide (microbiologic evidence vs. microbiologic evidence, clinical infection vs. clinical infection and empirical therapy vs. empirical therapy) and (3) neutropenic status.

RESULTS

Overall 128 patients [(69/123) (56.1%) in the daptomycin cohort (D) and 59/123 (48%) in the glycopeptide cohort (G)] had a resolution of fever at the end of 72 h antibiotic treatment (p = 0.25). There was no significant difference in cured, improved and (cured + improved) rates between (D) and (G) cohorts as well as fever of unknown origin cases or microbiologically confirmed infections or clinically defined infections subgroups (p > 0.05). There was also no significant difference (p > 0.05), in terms of persistent response in the (D) versus (G) cohorts, CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that although not better, daptomycin efficacy is comparable to vancomycin if used as empiric therapy in the treatment of adult febrile neutropenia. We conclude that daptomycin may be used at least as a salvage therapy alternative to glycopeptides in the treatment of adult febrile neutropenia cases. A large, randomized-controlled trial may further consolidate the evidence related to this question.

Evaluation of a risk-guided strategy for empirical carbapenem use in febrile neutropenia

Febrile neutropenia (FN) is associated with substantial morbidity and necessitates empirical broad-spectrum antimicrobial treatment. In this prospective cohort study, a risk-guided management strategy for FN using empirical piperacillin/tazobactam (TZP) or a carbapenem was evaluated. The analysis involved 723 FN episodes in hospitalised adult patients, including those with severe sepsis or prior infection/colonisation with extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Enterobacteriaceae. Propensity score matching analysis was used to adjust for baseline differences between treatment groups and produced 267 matched pairs. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were the incidences of drug-resistant Gram-negative (including ESBL-producing) and Gram-positive bacterial isolates and of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis (IPA) and their associated mortality. There was no difference in mortality between empirical carbapenem and TZP [18/267 (6.7%) vs. 14/267 (5.2%); P = 0.466]. Higher incidences of drug-resistant Gram-negative isolates [77/267 (28.8%) vs. 26/267 (9.7%); P < 0.001], including ESBL-producing bacteria [57/267 (21.3%) vs. 16/267 (6.0%); P < 0.001], were observed in carbapenem-treated episodes where its use lowered mortality. Mortality rates for ESBL-positive infections were 5.3% (3/57) and 25.0% (4/16) (P = 0.037) and for drug-resistant Gram-negative infections were 6.5% (5/77) and 23.1% (6/26) (P = 0.018) in carbapenem- and TZP-treated episodes, respectively. More IPA was observed with carbapenem use [16/267 (6.0%) vs. 6/267 (2.2%); P = 0.029]. Antifungal prophylaxis reduced the risk of death (odds ratio = 0.39, 95% confidence interval 0.17-0.87; P = 0.017). Risk-guided carbapenem prescribing in FN correctly identified cases prone to drug-resistant Gram-negative infections and reduced the mortality in these episodes.

A prospective randomized trial comparing piperacillin/tazobactam with meropenem as empirical antibiotic treatment of febrile neutropenic children and adolescents with hematologic and malignant disorders

BACKGROUND

This randomized prospective study was designed to assess whether piperacillin/tazobactam (PIPC/TAZ) is as effective as meropenem (MEPM) as a first-line antibiotic treatment for febrile neutropenia (FN).

PROCEDURE

FN episodes were randomly assigned to receive either PIPC/TAZ (337.5 mg/kg per day in three doses, 1-hr DIV, maximum 13.5 g per day) or MEPM (120 mg/kg per day in three doses, 1-hr DIV, maximum 3 g per day). Clinical responses were evaluated 120 hr after the DIV.

RESULTS

A total of 434 febrile episodes in 105 patients (42 females and 63 males) with a median age of 8 years (range 0-25) were included in this trial. Blood cultures were positive in 47 out of the 434 episodes (10.8%). Regarding responses to the treatment, success rates between the PIPC/TAZ and MEPM groups were similar (62.4 vs. 65.9%, P = 0.484), even if patients were restricted to those with bacteremia (26.1 vs 37.5%, P = 0.534). Mortality rates did not significantly differ between the two groups (0.8 vs. 0%, P = 0.500).

CONCLUSION

Both PIPC/TAZ and MEPM appeared to be equally efficacious and safe. Carbapenems are now broadly used to treat FN; however, this may increase the prevalence of drug-resistant bacteria. In this regard, the treatment using PIPC/TAZ for FN is more beneficial.

A clinical evaluation of efficacy and safety of cefepime monotherapy versus piperacillin-tazobactam in patients of paediatric age group with febrile neutropenia in a tertiary care centre of north India

Objective

To evaluate clinically the efficacy and safety in northern India of cefepime monotherapy versus piperacillin-tazobactam in patients of paediatric age group with febrile neutropenia.

Material and Methods

Children aged ≤18 years admitted febrile with chemotherapy-induced neutropenia were randomised into two groups comprising 20 cases in each group viz. CEF (receiving cefepime only) and PIP-TAZO (receiving piperacillin-tazobactam). Based on clinical and laboratory tests, patients were classified into: microbiologically documented infections (MDI); clinically documented infections (CDI); and unexplained fever (UF). They were assessed for clinical signs and symptoms as well as laboratory parameters at the time of enrolment and subsequently on days 3 and 7.

Results

Incidence of MDI, CDI and UF were 22.5%, 47.5% and 30%, respectively. The mean duration of neutropenia (in days) was 5.45 ± 2.1 in the PIP-TAZO group and 5.5 ± 1.5 in the CEF group ( P = 0.305). The success rate defined as clearing infection effectively and improvement of neutropenia was comparable ( P = 0.705). There was a mortality rate of 20% in the PIP-TAZO group as compared to 10% in the CEF group.

Conclusion

We conclude that cefepime monotherapy and piperacillin-tazobactam are equally efficacious and safe in treating patients with febrile neutropenia. Empirical monotherapy with cefepime would prevent an unnecessary extra economic burden as well as avoiding the serious adverse or toxic effects of multi-drug regimes, especially in low- and middle-income countries.

Meropenem versus piperacillin-tazobactam as empiric therapy for febrile neutropenia in pediatric oncology patients

BACKGROUND

Infection is a serious cause of mortality in febrile neutropenia of pediatric cancer patients. Recently, monotherapy has replaced the combination therapy in empirical treatment of febrile neutropenia. Since there has been no reported trial comparing the efficacy of meropenem and piperacillin-tazobactam (PIP/ TAZ) monotherapies, the present retrospective study was conducted to compare safety and efficacy in febrile neutropenic children with cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Charts of febrile, neutropenic children hospitalized at our center between March 2008 and April 2011 for hemato-oncological malignancies were reviewed. Patients received PIP/TAZ 360 mg/kg/day or meropenem 60 mg/kg/day intravenously in three divided doses. Duration of fever and neutropenia, absolute neutrophil count, modification, and success rate were compared between the two groups. Resolution of fever without antibiotic change was defined as success and resolution of fever with antibiotic change or death of a patient was defined as failure. Modification was defined as changing the empirical antimicrobial agent during a febrile episode.

RESULTS

Two hundred eighty four febrile neutropenic episodes were documented in 136 patients with a median age of 5 years. In 198 episodes meropenem and in 86 episodes PIP/ TAZ were used. Duration of fever and neutropenia, neutrophil count, sex, and primary disease were not different between two groups. Success rates and modification rate between two groups showed no significant differences (p>0.05). Overall success rate in the meropenem and PIP/TAZ groups were 92.4% and 91.9% respectively. No serious adverse effects occurred in either of the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Meropenem and PIP/TAZ monotherapy are equally safe and effective in the initial treatment of febrile neutropenia in children with cancer.

β-Lactam/β-lactamase inhibitors versus carbapenems for the treatment of sepsis: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Data on the relative efficacy of β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitors (BL/BLIs) versus carbapenems are scant.

METHODS

This is a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any BL/BLI versus any carbapenem for the treatment of sepsis. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. A broad search was conducted with no restrictions on language, publication status or date. Two reviewers independently applied the inclusion criteria and extracted the data. Assessment of risk of bias was performed using the domain-based approach. Subgroup analyses were used to investigate heterogeneity and focus on patient groups more likely to harbour ESBL-positive bacteria. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% CIs were calculated and pooled.

RESULTS

Thirty-one RCTs were included. There was no difference between BL/BLIs and carbapenems in terms of mortality (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.79-1.20), without heterogeneity. No differences were observed with regard to clinical or microbiological failure and bacterial superinfections. The results were not affected by risk of bias. No differences were detected in the subgroups of patients with nosocomial infections, Gram-negative infections and neutropenic fever. Adverse events requiring discontinuation were more common with BL/BLIs, on account of an increased incidence of diarrhoea. However, Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhoea (RR 0.29, 95% CI 0.10-0.87) was more frequent with carbapenems and seizures were more frequent with imipenem (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.05-0.93).

CONCLUSIONS

No differences in efficacy between BL/BLIs and carbapenems exist in RCTs including patient populations with a certain, albeit unknown, rate of ESBL-positive bacteria causing infections.

Piperacillin/tazobactam vs. cefoperazone/sulbactam in adult low-risk febrile neutropenia cases

AIM

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of piperacillin/tazobactam (P/T) and cefoperazone/sulbactam (C/S) in the empirical treatment of adult neutropenic fever.

METHODS

Data and outcomes of low-risk adult cases with neutropenic fever and treated with P/T (4.5 g q6h) or C/S (2 g q8h) between 2005 and 2011 June were extracted from our database. Risk evaluation was made according to criteria of Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) and a score of ≥ 21 was considered as low risk. Data were collected prospectively by daily visits and evaluated retrospectively. Primary outcome was - fever defervescence at 72 h in combination with success without modification (referring to episodes where the patient recovered from fever with disappearance of signs of infection without modification to initial empirical treatment). All-cause mortality referred to death resulting from a documented or presumed infection or unidentified reason during the treatment and 30-day follow-up period.

RESULTS

A total of 172 patients (113 cases P/T and 59 cases C/S) fulfilled the study inclusion criteria. Persistent response in P/T arm was 73.5%, whereas it was 64.5% in C/S arm (p > 0.05). Rates of any modification were also similar in both treatment arms. All-cause mortality during the treatment and 30-day follow-up period was not significantly different (P/T: 4/113 vs. C/S: 2/59, p > 0.05). There was no severe adverse effect requiring antibiotic cessation in both cohorts.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, our data suggest that C/S may be a safe alternative to P/T in the empirical treatment of adult low-risk febrile neutropenia cases.

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.

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.