Winston D J, Hathorn J W, Schuster M G, Schiller G J, Territo M C
Department of Medicine, UCLA Center for the Health Sciences, Los Angeles, USA.
Am J Med. 2000 Mar;108(4):282-9. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9343(99)00457-x.
To compare the efficacy and safety of fluconazole and amphotericin B as empiric antifungal therapy of febrile neutropenic patients with cancer.
A total of 317 neutropenic patients (<500 cells/mm3) with persistent or recrudescent fever despite 4 or more days of antibacterial therapy were randomly assigned to receive either fluconazole (400 mg intravenously once daily) or amphotericin B (0.5 mg/kg once daily). Patients were evaluated for the efficacy and safety of each drug by clinical criteria, frequent cultures and radiological procedures, and laboratory values. A response was classified as satisfactory at the end of therapy if the patient was afebrile, had no clinical or microbiological evidence of fungal infection, and did not require study termination due to lack of efficacy, drug toxicity, or death.
A satisfactory response occurred in 68% of the patients treated with fluconazole (107 of 158 patients) and in 67% of patients treated with amphotericin B (106 of 159 patients). Progressive or new fungal infections during therapy occurred in 13 (8%) patients treated with fluconazole (8 with Candida, 5 with Aspergillus) and in 10 (6%) patients treated with amphotericin B (5 with Candida, 3 with Aspergillus, 2 with other fungi). Adverse events related to study drug (especially fever, chills, renal insufficiency, electrolyte disturbances, and respiratory distress) occurred more often in patients treated with amphotericin B (128 [81%] of 159 patients) than patients treated with fluconazole (20 [13%] of 158 patients, P = 0.001). Eleven (7%) patients treated with amphotericin B but only 1 (1%) patient treated with fluconazole were terminated from the study owing to an adverse event (P = 0.005). Overall mortality (27 [17%] patients treated with fluconazole versus 34 [21%] patients treated with amphotericin B) and mortality from fungal infection (7 [4%] patients treated with fluconazole versus 5 [3%] patients treated with amphotericin B) were similar in each study group.
Intravenous fluconazole can be an effective and safe alternative to amphotericin B for empiric antifungal therapy in many febrile neutropenic patients. However, because fluconazole may be ineffective in the treatment of Aspergillus, patients at risk for that infection should be evaluated by chest radiograph, computed tomographic scanning, and cultures before the use of empiric fluconazole therapy.
比较氟康唑和两性霉素B作为癌症发热性中性粒细胞减少患者经验性抗真菌治疗的疗效和安全性。
共有317例中性粒细胞减少患者(<500个细胞/mm³),尽管接受了4天或更长时间的抗菌治疗仍持续发热或再次发热,被随机分配接受氟康唑(每日静脉注射400mg)或两性霉素B(每日0.5mg/kg)治疗。通过临床标准、频繁培养和放射学检查以及实验室检查评估每种药物的疗效和安全性。如果患者体温正常,没有真菌感染的临床或微生物学证据,并且由于缺乏疗效、药物毒性或死亡而不需要终止研究,则在治疗结束时将反应分类为满意。
接受氟康唑治疗的患者中有68%(158例中的107例)获得满意反应,接受两性霉素B治疗的患者中有67%(159例中的106例)获得满意反应。接受氟康唑治疗的患者中有13例(8%)(8例念珠菌感染,5例曲霉菌感染)在治疗期间出现进行性或新的真菌感染,接受两性霉素B治疗的患者中有10例(6%)(5例念珠菌感染,3例曲霉菌感染,2例其他真菌感染)出现此类情况。与研究药物相关的不良事件(尤其是发热、寒战、肾功能不全、电解质紊乱和呼吸窘迫)在接受两性霉素B治疗的患者(159例中的128例[81%])中比接受氟康唑治疗的患者(158例中的20例[13%])中更常见(P = 0.001)。由于不良事件,接受两性霉素B治疗的患者中有11例(7%)但接受氟康唑治疗的患者中只有1例(1%)被终止研究(P = 0.005)。每个研究组的总死亡率(接受氟康唑治疗的患者中有27例[17%],接受两性霉素B治疗的患者中有34例[21%])和真菌感染死亡率(接受氟康唑治疗的患者中有7例[4%],接受两性霉素B治疗的患者中有5例[3%])相似。
对于许多发热性中性粒细胞减少患者,静脉注射氟康唑可作为两性霉素B经验性抗真菌治疗的有效且安全的替代药物。然而,由于氟康唑可能对曲霉菌感染无效,在使用经验性氟康唑治疗之前,应通过胸部X线、计算机断层扫描和培养对有该感染风险的患者进行评估。