Suppr超能文献

两性霉素B与氟康唑用于控制中性粒细胞减少癌症患者的真菌感染

Amphotericin B versus fluconazole for controlling fungal infections in neutropenic cancer patients.

作者信息

Johansen H K, Gøtzsche P C

机构信息

The Nordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet, Dept. 7112, Blegdamsvej 9, DK-2100 Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.

出版信息

Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002(2):CD000239. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000239.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Systemic fungal infection is considered to be an important cause of morbidity and mortality in cancer patients, particularly those with neutropenia. Antifungal drugs are often given prophylactically, or to patients with persistent fever.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effect of fluconazole and amphotericin B on morbidity and mortality in patients with cancer complicated by neutropenia.

SEARCH STRATEGY

MEDLINE and Cochrane Library (November 2001). Letters, abstracts, and unpublished trials. The industry and authors were contacted.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing fluconazole with amphotericin B.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data on mortality, invasive fungal infection, colonisation, use of additional (escape) antifungal therapy and adverse effects leading to discontinuation of therapy were extracted by both authors independently.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixteen trials (3760 patients, 341 deaths) were included. In 3 large 3-armed trials, results for amphotericin B were combined with results for nystatin in a "polyene" group. Because nystatin is an ineffective drug in these circumstances, this approach creates a bias in favour of fluconazole. Furthermore, most patients were randomised to oral amphotericin B, which is poorly absorbed and poorly documented. It was unclear whether there was overlap among the "polyene" trials. We were unable to obtain any information to clarify these issues from the trial authors or from Pfizer, the manufacturer of fluconazole. There were no significant differences in effect between fluconazole and amphotericin B, but the confidence intervals were wide. More patients dropped out of the study when they received amphotericin B, but as none of the trials were blinded, decisions on premature interruption of therapy could have been biased. Furthermore, amphotericin B was rarely given under optimal circumstances, with premedication to reduce infusion-related toxicity, slow infusion, and with potassium and magnesium supplements to prevent nephrotoxicity.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Amphotericin B had been disfavoured in several of the trials through their design or analysis. Since intravenous amphotericin B is the only antifungal agent for which there is good evidence suggesting an effect on mortality and is considerably cheaper than fluconazole, it should be preferred.

摘要

背景

系统性真菌感染被认为是癌症患者发病和死亡的重要原因,尤其是那些中性粒细胞减少的患者。抗真菌药物通常用于预防性给药,或用于持续发热的患者。

目的

比较氟康唑和两性霉素B对合并中性粒细胞减少的癌症患者发病率和死亡率的影响。

检索策略

检索MEDLINE和Cochrane图书馆(2001年11月)。检索信件、摘要和未发表的试验。联系了制药行业和作者。

选择标准

比较氟康唑和两性霉素B的随机试验。

数据收集与分析

两位作者独立提取关于死亡率、侵袭性真菌感染、定植、额外(补救)抗真菌治疗的使用情况以及导致治疗中断的不良反应的数据。

主要结果

纳入了16项试验(3760例患者,341例死亡)。在3项大型三臂试验中,两性霉素B的结果与制霉菌素在“多烯”组中的结果合并。由于制霉菌素在这些情况下是一种无效药物,这种方法造成了有利于氟康唑的偏差。此外,大多数患者被随机分配接受口服两性霉素B,其吸收差且记录不充分。不清楚“多烯”试验之间是否存在重叠。我们无法从试验作者或氟康唑制造商辉瑞公司获得任何信息来澄清这些问题。氟康唑和两性霉素B在疗效上没有显著差异,但置信区间较宽。接受两性霉素B治疗的患者退出研究的更多,但由于所有试验均未设盲,治疗过早中断的决定可能存在偏差。此外,两性霉素B很少在最佳情况下给药,即通过预处理以降低输液相关毒性、缓慢输液,并补充钾和镁以预防肾毒性。

综述作者结论

在一些试验中,两性霉素B因设计或分析而未受到青睐。由于静脉注射两性霉素B是唯一有充分证据表明对死亡率有影响且比氟康唑便宜得多的抗真菌药物,因此应优先选择。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验