Yamamura D, Gucalp R, Carlisle P, Cimino M, Roberts J, Rotstein C
Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1997 Aug;41(8):1704-8. doi: 10.1128/AAC.41.8.1704.
An open-label randomized trial comparing the efficacy and safety of cefepime versus piperacillin plus gentamicin (P+G) given intravenously for the treatment of febrile episodes in neutropenic patients with underlying malignancy was conducted at two oncology centers. Over a 30-month period 111 patients were enrolled and 99 patients were found to be suitable for evaluation. At the 72-h time of evaluation, cefepime monotherapy and P+G combination therapy produced comparable clinical response rates (78% for both). P+G and cefepime produced comparable response rates in microbiologically documented (78 versus 71%), clinically documented (100 versus 100%), and possible (75 versus 79%) infections. The P+G and cefepime treatments achieved comparable microbiological eradication of gram-negative (100 versus 71%) (P = 0.09) and gram-positive (44 versus 70%) (P = 0.37) organisms. There were no statistically significant differences in the rates of superinfection between the groups; however, more superinfections of fungal origin were noted in the P+G group. Cefepime was demonstrated to be an effective and safe treatment for febrile episodes in neutropenic patients with malignancies, and its lack of nephrotoxicity compared to P+G was noteworthy. Cefepime appears to be a candidate for monotherapy in febrile neutropenic cancer patients.
在两个肿瘤中心进行了一项开放标签随机试验,比较头孢吡肟与哌拉西林加庆大霉素(P+G)静脉给药治疗合并潜在恶性肿瘤的中性粒细胞减少患者发热性发作的疗效和安全性。在30个月的时间里,共纳入111例患者,其中99例患者适合评估。在评估的72小时时,头孢吡肟单药治疗和P+G联合治疗产生了相当的临床缓解率(两者均为78%)。在微生物学确诊(78%对71%)、临床确诊(100%对100%)和可能(75%对79%)的感染中,P+G和头孢吡肟产生了相当的缓解率。P+G和头孢吡肟治疗在革兰氏阴性菌(100%对71%)(P = 0.09)和革兰氏阳性菌(44%对70%)(P = 0.37)的微生物清除方面相当。两组间二重感染率无统计学显著差异;然而,P+G组中真菌源性二重感染更多。头孢吡肟被证明是治疗合并恶性肿瘤的中性粒细胞减少患者发热性发作的一种有效且安全的疗法,与P+G相比,其缺乏肾毒性值得注意。头孢吡肟似乎是发热性中性粒细胞减少癌症患者单药治疗的一个候选药物。