A randomised trial of empirical antibiotic therapy in febrile neutropenic patients with hematological disorders: ceftazidime versus azlocillin plus amikacin

Abstract

One hundred and two patients with neutropenia (less than 1 x 10(9)/L) secondary to primary hematological disorders or chemotherapy for hematological malignancies were prospectively randomised, upon the development of fever or other signs of infection, to receive empirical antibiotic treatment with either ceftazidime (+/- flucloxacillin) (n = 52) or azlocillin plus amikacin (+/- flucloxacillin) (A&A, n = 50). The two groups were equivalent with respect to clinical and laboratory parameters prior to antibiotic therapy and flucloxacillin was added to approximately 25% of the patients in each group on the clinical suspicion of Gram positive infection. When assessed at 96 hours, the complete response rates were 59.6% for the ceftazidime treated patients and 44% for A&A treated patients. Partial response rates were 17% and 20% respectively. This difference was not statistically significant. Eight patients died whilst on the trial, three of those initially randomised to ceftazidime and five initially randomised to A&A. Moderate to severe hypokalemia was encountered significantly less often in the ceftazidime treated group (p less than 0.01), whilst other parameters of toxicity were equivalent. No primary or acquired resistance to ceftazidime was encountered. Separate analysis of those patients who did not receive flucloxacillin yielded identical results. We conclude that ceftazidime (+/- flucloxacillin) is as efficacious as azlocillin plus amikacin (+/- flucloxacillin) in the empirical antibiotic management of such patients and is associated with a lower incidence of moderate to severe hypokalemia.