de Lalla F
Department of Infectious Diseases, S Bortolo Hospital, Vicenza, Italy.
Drugs. 1997 May;53(5):789-804. doi: 10.2165/00003495-199753050-00005.
The increased frequency of infections caused by Gram-positive microorganisms, and the expansion of resistant pathogens resulting from institutional therapeutic practices, represent some of the emerging issues of empirical drug treatment of cancer patients with febrile neutropenia. However, the therapeutic strategies for the treatment of these patients have progressed remarkably over the last decade. Individual therapy in the light of the principal clinical features (in particular, the degree and estimated duration of neutropenia, as well the presence of other potential factors favouring infection such as long-standing intravascular catheters) and local microbial ecology have emerged as the leading concepts. Empirical drug monotherapy has been recognised as a feasible alternative to combination therapy, at least in selected low-risk patients. The indiscriminate use of empirical glycopeptides should be discouraged to prevent the emergence of resistant bacteria, especially in centres where methicillin-resistant staphylococci have not yet become a major issue. Empirical antifungal therapy with amphotericin B is still essential for a successful outcome in case of fever persistence or recurrence. Finally, selected febrile neutropenic patients who exhibit a better prognosis can be handled on an outpatient basis. The prophylactic use of haemopoietic growth factors has been shown to augment cost savings substantially in the management of neutropenic patients via a reduction in the duration and severity of the neutropenia, as well as infectious complications. Although data from economic analyses are not yet available, some cost-containment strategies such as outpatient treatment, monotherapy, and use of more convenient antibiotic combinations may lead to a reduction of therapy expenditures for febrile episodes in these patients.
革兰氏阳性微生物引起的感染频率增加,以及机构性治疗实践导致的耐药病原体增多,是癌症发热性中性粒细胞减少症患者经验性药物治疗中出现的一些新问题。然而,在过去十年中,这些患者的治疗策略有了显著进展。根据主要临床特征(特别是中性粒细胞减少的程度和预计持续时间,以及其他有利于感染的潜在因素,如长期存在的血管内导管)和局部微生物生态学进行个体化治疗已成为主要理念。经验性药物单药治疗已被认为是联合治疗的一种可行替代方案,至少在选定的低风险患者中如此。应避免滥用经验性糖肽类药物以防止耐药菌的出现,特别是在耐甲氧西林葡萄球菌尚未成为主要问题的中心。对于持续发热或复发的病例,经验性使用两性霉素B进行抗真菌治疗对于取得成功结果仍然至关重要。最后,部分预后较好的发热性中性粒细胞减少症患者可以在门诊进行治疗。造血生长因子的预防性使用已被证明,通过缩短中性粒细胞减少的持续时间和减轻其严重程度以及减少感染并发症,可在很大程度上节省中性粒细胞减少症患者的管理成本。尽管尚未获得经济分析数据,但一些成本控制策略,如门诊治疗、单药治疗以及使用更方便的抗生素联合方案,可能会降低这些患者发热发作的治疗费用。