D. Marshall

A Randomized Trial Comparing Ceftazidime Alone with Combination Antibiotic Therapy in Cancer Patients with Fever and Neutropenia

To assess the efficacy of single-agent therapy relative to standard combination antibiotic therapy for the initial management of fever and neutropenia in cancer patients, we conducted a randomized trial comparing ceftazidime alone with a combination of cephalothin, gentamicin, and carbenicillin. Of 550 evaluable episodes of fever and neutropenia, 282 were treated with ceftazidime alone and 268 with the combination. All episodes were evaluated for responses at 72 hours after the start of treatment and at resolution of the neutropenia. Of the patients with unexplained fever who were given ceftazidime alone, 99 percent were alive at 72 hours and 98 percent were alive when the neutropenia resolved, as compared with 100 percent and 98 percent, respectively, of those given combination therapy. Of the patients with documented infection who were given ceftazidime alone, 98 percent were alive at 72 hours and 89 percent when the neutropenia resolved, as compared with 98 percent and 91 percent, respectively, of those given combination therapy. The majority of episodes of documented infection in both treatment groups necessitated additional antimicrobial treatment or other modifications of the initial regimen, as compared with only 22 percent of the episodes of unexplained fever. We conclude that initial single-agent therapy with certain beta-lactam antibiotics is a safe alternative to standard combination antibiotic therapy, although patients with documented infection or protracted neutropenia are likely to require additional or modified treatment.

Gram-Positive Infections and the Use of Vancomycin in 550 Episodes of Fever and Neutropenia

STUDY OBJECTIVE To determine the appropriate role for vancomycin in neutropenic patients with cancer. To review the incidence, types, and outcome of gram-positive infections in a series of neutropenic patients with cancer. DESIGN Retrospective review. SETTING Inpatient units of the Medical and Pediatric Oncology Branches of the National Cancer Institute. PATIENTS Five hundred and fifty consecutive episodes of fever and neutropenia in patients with cancer randomized prospectively on another study to receive either ceftazidime alone or combination antibiotics for initial empirical therapy. INTERVENTION Intravenous vancomycin (dosage adjusted by serum levels). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS Gram-positive organisms were the commonest of the bacterial pathogens isolated (63%). Of the 53 gram-positive organisms accounting for primary infections (isolated at initial presentation), there were 36 staphylococcal isolates (19 coagulase-negative and 17 coagulase-positive), 13 streptococcal isolates (8 non-group D and 5 group D), and 4 polymicrobial isolates. Of the 22 secondary gram-positive infections (occurring after institution of initial antibiotics), there were 10 streptococcal isolates (9 group D and 1 non-group D), 7 staphylococcal isolates (6 coagulase-negative and 1 coagulase-positive), and 5 polymicrobial isolates. Vancomycin was used to treat 26 of the 53 primary infections, but was begun only after knowledge of the isolate in 25. Vancomycin was used to treat 17 of the 22 secondary infections, and begun only after knowledge of the isolate in 14. This approach resulted in no treatment failures for the primary infections, and a single microbiological failure for the secondary infections. There was a tendency towards a greater proportion of secondary gram-positive infections in the monotherapy group compared to the combination therapy group (16 of 282 compared with 6 of 268 respectively, P2 = 0.04 by the chi-squared test); but all were treated successfully. CONCLUSION Vancomycin need not be included in routine empirical therapy for febrile neutropenic patients, but should be added when clinical or microbiological data suggest the need.

Monotherapy for fever and neutropenia in cancer patients: a randomized comparison of ceftazidime versus imipenem.

PURPOSE To compare the efficacy of ceftazidime and imipenem monotherapy for fever and neutropenia, and to determine whether fewer antimicrobial modifications (additions or changes) are required by the broader-spectrum agent, imipenem. PATIENTS AND METHODS Adult and pediatric patients undergoing chemotherapy for solid tumors, leukemias, or lymphomas were randomized to receive open-label ceftazidime or imipenem on presentation with fever and neutropenia. Success with or without modifications of the initial antibiotic was defined as survival through neutropenia; failure was death due to infection. Comparisons were based on numbers of modifications made to each monotherapy during the course of neutropenia, in patients stratified as having unexplained fever or a documented infection. RESULTS Among 204 ceftazidime and 195 imipenem recipients, the overall success rate with or without modification was more than 98%, regardless of initial antibiotic regimen. Modifications occurred in half of all episodes, primarily in patients with documented infections on either monotherapy. Antianaerobic agents were more frequently added to ceftazidime (P < .001), but addition of other antibiotics, including vancomycin and aminoglycosides, was similar between the two monotherapy groups. Imipenem therapy was associated with significantly greater toxicity, manifested by Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea and by nausea and vomiting, which required discontinuation of imipenem in 10% of recipients. CONCLUSION Ceftazidime and imipenem are both effective in the management of fever and chemotherapy-related neutropenia, provided that modifications are made in response to clinical and microbiologic data that emerge during the course of neutropenia. Imipenem, despite its broader antimicrobial spectrum, does not significantly decrease the overall need for antibiotic modifications and is more often complicated by gastrointestinal toxicity.

A Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing the Infectious and Noninfectious Complications of an Externalized Catheter Versus a Subcutaneously Implanted Device in Cancer Patients

PURPOSE To compare the frequency of infectious episodes or other problems occurring with an externalized catheter (Hickman) versus a subcutaneously implanted device (Port-a-Cath, Pharmacia, Piscataway, NJ) in cancer patients, we performed a prospective, randomized study in 100 cancer patients (age range, 5 to 74 years). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients who were chemotherapy candidates and required an indwelling catheter were monitored prospectively and evaluated during the 180 days after the insertion of the catheter and again at time of study closure. The frequency of catheter use, reason for access, and any problems that might have been related to catheter use were noted. All data were collected prospectively and included the patients age, sex, underlying malignancy, temperature, and leukocyte and absolute granulocyte counts at the time of catheter insertion and when complications occurred. The time to and reason for removal of the catheter, as well as any intercurrent infectious or mechanical problems, were also determined. RESULTS Most of the infections that occurred were caused by gram-positive organisms, especially staphylococci or streptococci. A total of 22 complications (11 in each group) resulted in removal of the central line. Only one infection in the Hickman catheter group and four in the Port-a-Cath group led to removal of the central line. All other infectious episodes were successfully treated without removal of the catheters. The mean device life was 230 days for the Hickman catheter and 318 days for the Port-a-Cath (not significant). CONCLUSION There were no differences between the two study groups regarding incidence of documented infections or mechanical or thrombotic complications.

Approaching the controversies in antibacterial management of cancer patients

The principles for management of infectious complications in cancer patients are continuing to evolve. The critical element includes the prompt institution of broad-spectrum antibiotic(s) empirically when granulocytopenic patients become febrile and continuation and modification of the regimen in patients with persistent fever and granulocytopenia. The view is presented that antibiotics provide systemic prophylaxis as well as therapy in persistently granulocytopenic patients and that they should be continued until all signs of infection have cleared or the granulocyte count has recovered. Such aggressive therapy, supplemented by continued evaluation and monitoring of the patient, can significantly reduce infection-relation morbidity and mortality.

New beta-lactam antibiotics in granulocytopenic patients: New options and new questions

Infectious complications are a frequent cause of morbidity and, at many centers, the major cause of death in patients with cancer. The increased risk and severity of infectious sequelae result from profound alterations in normal host defenses that occur secondary to the underlying malignancy and the treatment thereof. During the last decade, early empiric antibiotic therapy has become standard practice in the initial management of febrile granulocytopenic patients and has contributed significantly to the improved outcome among patients undergoing cancer therapy. Although early death due to unsuspected or inadequately treated bacterial infection has been largely overcome, new problems--also with life-threatening implications--have emerged. As the use of cancer chemotherapy continues to increase, new populations of patients are being placed at increased risk of infection. Defining the host and environmental factors that contribute to this risk assumes central importance for delineating those patients who require the most intense surveillance. Changing medical practices (e.g., increased use of indwelling catheters) have contributed to the emergence of new pathogens. Recent drug developments (e.g., the third-generation cephalosporins and extended-spectrum penicillins) offer new treatment options, as well as generate controversy and confusion. For example, authorities disagree on the optimal duration and modifications in treatment that are required by cancer patients who remain granulocytopenic and who thus are at continued risk of multiple infectious episodes or superinfections. A question of current interest is whether combination therapy with synergistic agents is important in light of the development of the third-generation cephalosporins and extended-spectrum penicillins. Several of these new antibiotics have an exceedingly broad spectrum of activity that includes Pseudomonas aeruginosa, as well as Enterobacteriaceae, Serratia, Citrobacter, indole-positive Proteus, and anaerobes (including Bacteroides fragilis). However, the third-generation cephalosporins are not as active against staphylococci and streptococci as are the first-generation cephalosporins, and none is effective against enterococci. Nonetheless, these agents achieve serum levels that can be 10 to 100 times greater than the minimal inhibitory and bactericidal concentrations of gram-negative bacteria, raising the possibility that these drugs might be effective as single agents. The advantages of the third-generation cephalosporins are their minimal toxicity and long serum half-lives.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

ROLE OF RESPIRATORY VIRUSES IN THE ETIOLOGY OF FEVER |[lpar]|F|[plus]||[rpar]| OCCURRING DURING CHEMOTHERAPY-INDUCED GRANULOCYOPENIA|[lpar]|G|[plus]||[rpar]|

Nearly half of the fevers (>38.0°C) occurring during chemotherapy-induced G+ do not have a defined bacterial origin. We investigated whether respiratory viruses might account for some of these F+ episodes either as the primary cause of F+, as a coinfection, or an antecedent infection. During an 11 month period, throat washings obtained from 60 F+G+ adult and pediatric cancer patients were assayed for common respiratory viruses by enzyme-linked immunoassay. Positive viral washings were found in 25% of patients (15% influenza, 8% adenovirus, 2% parainfluenza). Patients with positive viral washings could not be distinguished on the basis of presenting symptoms, initial chest x-ray findings, height of initial F+, duration of F+, initial neutrophil count, or duration of G+. A bacterial infection was diagnosed in 15 of 44 patients with negative viral washings and 1 of 15 with positive viral washings. Respiratory viruses were not infrequently identified in patients with F+G+. Although the relatively small number of episodes studied precludes a definitive conclusion, respiratory virus infection does not appear to be implicated as an antecedent event for bacterial infection in F+G+ episodes and may be a primary cause of fever in this patient population. This study is continuing.

The Febrile Neutropenic Patient: Newer Options for Empirical Therapy

It has become well accepted that the onset of fever in a neutropenic patient requires the prompt initiation of empirical antimicrobial therapy. The main goal of empirical antibiotics is to protect against the early morbidity and mortality associated with untreated bacterial infections in the neutropenic population.

A Randomized Trial Comparing Ceftazidime Alone With Combination Antibiotic Therapy in Cancer Patients With Fever and Neutropenia

To assess the efficacy of single-agent therapy relative to standard combination antibiotic therapy for the initial management of fever and neutropenia in cancer patients, we conducted a randomized trial comparing ceftazidime alone with a combination of cephalothin, gentamicin, and carbenicillin. Of 550 evaluable episodes of fever and neutropenia, 282 were treated with ceftazidime alone and 268 with the combination. All episodes were evaluated for responses at 72 hours after the start of treatment and at resolution of the neutropenia. Of the patients with unexplained fever who were given ceftazidime alone, 99 percent were alive at 72 hours and 98 percent were alive when the neutropenia resolved, as compared with 100 percent and 98 percent, respectively, of those given combination therapy. Of the patients with documented infection who were given ceftazidime alone, 98 percent were alive at 72 hours and 89 percent when the neutropenia resolved, as compared with 98 percent and 91 percent, respectively, of those given combination therapy. The majority of episodes of documented infection in both treatment groups necessitated additional antimicrobial treatment or other modifications of the initial regimen, as compared with only 22 percent of the episodes of unexplained fever. We conclude that initial single-agent therapy with certain beta-lactam antibiotics is a safe alternative to standard combination antibiotic therapy, although patients with documented infection or protracted neutropenia are likely to require additional or modified treatment.