Vidal Liat, Paul Mical, Ben dor Itsik, Soares-Weiser Karla, Leibovici Leonard
Department of Medicine E, Beilinson Campus, Rabin Medical Center, Petah Tiqva 49100.
J Antimicrob Chemother. 2004 Jul;54(1):29-37. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkh303. Epub 2004 Jun 16.
Neutropenia is one of the grave consequences of cancer chemotherapy, and the treatment of neutropenic febrile patients with intravenous (iv) antibiotics has been shown to reduce mortality. Oral therapy could be an alternative approach for selected patients.
To compare the efficacy of oral antibiotics versus iv antibiotic therapy in febrile neutropenic cancer patients.
The Cochrane Library, the Cochrane Cancer Network Register of trials, EMBASE, LILACS and MEDLINE, databases for ongoing trials and the conference proceedings of the Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy (ICAAC).
Randomized controlled trials comparing oral antibiotic/s and iv antibiotic/s for the treatment of neutropenic cancer patients with fever.
Two reviewers independently assessed trial eligibility, methodological quality and extracted all data. Data concerning mortality, treatment failures and adverse events were drawn from included studies assuming an 'intention-to-treat' and 'per-protocol' basis for the outcome measures whenever possible. Relative risks (RR) with their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous data were estimated.
Fifteen trials (median mortality 0, range 0%-8.8%) were included in the analyses. The mortality rate was similar comparing oral and iv antibiotic treatment (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.49-1.41, 2224 patients). Treatment failure rates were also similar (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.84-1.05, 15 trials). No significant heterogeneity was shown for the primary outcomes. This effect was stable in a wide range of patients. Quinolones alone or combined with other antibiotics were used with comparable results. Adverse reactions, mostly gastrointestinal, were more common with oral antibiotics.
Oral antibiotics may be safely offered to neutropenic patients with fever who are at low risk for mortality.
中性粒细胞减少是癌症化疗的严重后果之一,已证明使用静脉注射(iv)抗生素治疗发热性中性粒细胞减少患者可降低死亡率。对于部分患者,口服治疗可能是一种替代方法。
比较口服抗生素与静脉注射抗生素治疗发热性中性粒细胞减少癌症患者的疗效。
考克兰图书馆、考克兰癌症试验注册库、EMBASE、LILACS和MEDLINE、正在进行试验的数据库以及抗菌药物和化疗跨科学会议(ICAAC)的会议记录。
比较口服抗生素和静脉注射抗生素治疗发热性中性粒细胞减少癌症患者的随机对照试验。
两名评价员独立评估试验的入选资格、方法学质量并提取所有数据。关于死亡率、治疗失败和不良事件的数据尽可能从纳入研究中获取,假设结果测量采用“意向性治疗”和“符合方案”基础。估计二分数据的相对风险(RR)及其95%置信区间(CI)。
分析纳入了15项试验(中位死亡率为0,范围为0%-8.8%)。口服和静脉注射抗生素治疗的死亡率相似(RR 0.83,95% CI 0.49-1.41,2224例患者)。治疗失败率也相似(RR 0.94,95% CI 0.84-1.05,15项试验)。主要结局未显示显著异质性。在广泛的患者范围内,这种效果是稳定的。单独使用喹诺酮类药物或与其他抗生素联合使用,结果相当。不良反应大多为胃肠道反应,口服抗生素更常见。
对于死亡风险较低的发热性中性粒细胞减少患者,可以安全地提供口服抗生素治疗。