Monotherapy versus dual therapy based on risk categorization of febrile neutropenic patients
- PMID: 15250023
- DOI: 10.1086/383056
Monotherapy versus dual therapy based on risk categorization of febrile neutropenic patients
Abstract
Cefepime monotherapy was compared with cefepime-plus-amikacin dual therapy for treatment of febrile neutropenic patients. Response rates were significantly lower for patients receiving monotherapy who had neutrophil counts of <500 cells/mm3 but did not differ significantly between patients receiving dual therapy who had neutrophil counts of > or =500 cells/mm3 or <500 cells/mm3. Dual therapy is recommended for the initial treatment of patients with neutropenia with <500 cells/mm3. Dual therapy was significantly more effective in patients with neutropenia lasting <5 days. The response rates to monotherapy or dual therapy did not differ significantly when neutropenia persisted for > or =6 days, indicating that sustained neutropenia is a risk factor for failure of initial empirical therapy. The rate of response to monotherapy was lower in leukemic patients, whereas the rate of response to dual therapy did not differ between leukemic and nonleukemic groups. The rate of response to either monotherapy or dual therapy did not differ for patients with temperatures of > or =38 degrees C or 37.5 degrees C-38 degrees C. Overall, defervescence occurred in >80% of patients with mild infections, whereas only 32% of those with moderate to severe infection responded by day 3 and 69.8% by day 7.
Similar articles
-
Randomized trial of cefepime monotherapy or cefepime in combination with amikacin as empirical therapy for febrile neutropenia.Clin Infect Dis. 2004 Jul 15;39 Suppl 1:S15-24. doi: 10.1086/383046. Clin Infect Dis. 2004. PMID: 15250016 Clinical Trial.
-
Initial empirical antimicrobial therapy: duration and subsequent modifications.Clin Infect Dis. 2004 Jul 15;39 Suppl 1:S59-64. doi: 10.1086/383057. Clin Infect Dis. 2004. PMID: 15250024
-
Clinical guidelines for the management of neutropenic patients with unexplained fever in Japan: validation by the Japan Febrile Neutropenia Study Group.Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2005 Dec;26 Suppl 2:S123-7; discussion S133-40. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2005.08.001. Epub 2005 Oct 24. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2005. PMID: 16249072
-
Febrile neutropenia in haematological malignancies.J Postgrad Med. 2005;51 Suppl 1:S42-8. J Postgrad Med. 2005. PMID: 16519255 Review.
-
[Antimicrobial prophylaxis and therapy in neutropenia].Mycoses. 2003;46 Suppl 2:21-32. Mycoses. 2003. PMID: 15055140 Review. German.
Cited by
-
Evidence-based guidelines for empirical therapy of neutropenic fever in Korea.Korean J Intern Med. 2011 Jun;26(2):220-52. doi: 10.3904/kjim.2011.26.2.220. Epub 2011 Jun 1. Korean J Intern Med. 2011. PMID: 21716917 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Predictive factors of poor prognosis in cancer patients with chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia.Support Care Cancer. 2011 Aug;19(8):1151-8. doi: 10.1007/s00520-010-0928-4. Epub 2010 Jun 16. Support Care Cancer. 2011. PMID: 20552376
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical