Empiric antifungal therapy in febrile granulocytopenic patients

doi:10.1016/0002-9343(89)90441-5

The American Journal of Medicine

Volume 86, Issue 6, June 1989, Pages 668-672

https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9343(89)90441-5 Get rights and content

Abstract

purpose: The optimal management of fever in granulocytopenic patients remains controversial. Invasive fungal infections are common and life-threatening but are difficult to diagnose early. In this randomized study, we investigated the potential value of empiric administration of amphotericin B (versus no empiric antifungal therapy) in 132 patients remaining febrile and granulocytopenic despite broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy for four days.

patients and methods: The patients were divided into two groups: 68 who were randomly assigned to receive empiric amphotericin B, and 64 who were randomly assigned to continued only the protocol antibiotics that they were already receiving. Amphotericin B was administered intravenously as follows: every other day at a dose of 1.2 mg/kg body weight or daily at a dose of 0.6 mg/kg body weight. Clinical response was evaluated as success or failure, depending upon the febrile course after randomization.

results: Based on the evolution of fever, the response rate was 6.9% in the group of patients receiving empiric amphotericin B and 53% for the other group (p = 0.09). There were six documented (four severe) fungal infections in 64 patients randomized not to receive the antifungal therapy as compared to only one fungemia among 68 patients treated empirically with amphotericin B (p = 0.1). No deaths due to fungal infection occurred among the patients receiving empiric amphotericin B compared to four in the other group (p = 0.05). However, this study did not demonstrate a difference in survival between the two groups of patients (with or without empiric amphotericin B). The benefit of empiric administration of amphotericin B was primarily observed in specific subgroups of patients, such as those who did not receive any antifungal prophylaxis (78% versus 45%, p = 0.04), those who were severely granulocytopenic (69% versus 46%, p = 0.06), febrile patients with a clinically documented infection (75% versus 41%, p = 0.03), and patients older than 15 years of age (67% versus 47%, p = 0.06).

conclusion: These data suggest a benefit for early amphotericin B treatment in granulocytopenic patients with continued fever despite antibiotic therapy.

References (19)

G Bodey
Fungal infections complicating acute leukemia
J Chronic Dis
(1966)
J Krick et al.
Opportunistic invasive fungal infection in patients with leukemia and lymphoma
Clin Haematol
(1976)
M De Gregorio et al.
Fungal infections in patients with acute leukemia
Am J Med
(1982)
F Meunier-Carpentier et al.
Fungemia in the immunocompromised host
Am J Med
(1981)
BD Fisher et al.
Invasive aspergillosis
PA Pizzo et al.
Empiric antibiotic and antifungal therapy for cancer patients with prolonged fever and granulocytopenia
Am J Med
(1982)
JR Wingard et al.
Prevention of fungal sepsis in patients with prolonged neutropenia: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of intravenous miconazole
Am J Med
(1987)
S Mirsky et al.
Fungal infection in acute leukemia
Cancer
(1972)
JP Sculier et al.
Causes of death in febrile granulocytopenic cancer patients receiving empiric antibiotic therapy
Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol
(1981)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (335)

Most Common Pathogens in Neutropenic Cancer Patients
2017, Infectious Diseases, 2-Volume Set
Does the current treatment of invasive fungal infection need to be reviewed?
2014, Enfermedades Infecciosas y Microbiologia Clinica
Citation Excerpt :
Since the main objective of the EAT is to improve IFI prognosis with prompt therapy, universal EAT in neutropenic patients after 5–7 days of persistent fever has been traditionally recommended by the main scientific societies. Scientific evidence supporting this recommendation is weak and based on two clinical trials with small sample size and questionable methodology that compared the administration of amphotericin vs. placebo and failed to demonstrate significantly reduced IFI incidence or IFI related mortality.34,35 Subsequently there have been several large comparative studies to identify which is the best drug for EAT,13–15,36–39 but no further studies have been done demonstrating that EAT reduces IFI incidence or IFI related mortality.
Invasive fungal infections (IFIs) are becoming more frequent due to the increasing number of patients at risk. Over the last decade, their prognosis has improved with the diagnostic and therapeutic advances, including new antifungals. In the two years, from 2007 to 2009, antifungal consumption increased by 27%, 67 times more than antibacterial consumption, albeit with great differences between hospitals. The scientific evidence of the indications for antifungal prophylaxis and targeted antifungal therapy is strong; however, it is weak for empirical antifungal therapy, which is the most common indication. Antifungals are not harmless, since they are associated with a wide range of adverse effects and drug interactions, favor the development of resistance, contribute to other fungal superinfections and cause significant healthcare spending.
Therefore, the question arises whether this extraordinary increase in consumption is justified, whether the use of antifungals is optimal, or whether it is necessary to reconsider the current treatment of IFIs instead.
Las infecciones fúngicas invasoras (IFIs) son cada vez más frecuentes debido a un aumento pacientes en riesgo. En la última década, su pronóstico ha mejorado con los avances diagnósticos y terapéuticos, incluyendo los nuevos antifúngicos. En dos años, de 2007 a 2009, el consumo antifúngico aumentó un 27%, 67 veces más que el consumo de antibacterianos, aunque con grandes diferencias entre hospitales. La evidencia científica de las indicaciones de profilaxis antifúngica y terapia antifúngica dirigida es fuerte, sin embargo es débil para la terapia antifúngica empírica, que es la indicación más común. Los antifúngicos no son inofensivos ya que se asocian efectos adversos e interacciones medicamentosas, favorecen el desarrollo de resistencias, contribuyen a otras sobreinfecciones micóticas y causan un importante gasto sanitario.
Por lo tanto, la pregunta que surge es si este aumento extraordinario del consumo se justifica, si el uso de antifúngicos es óptimo o si es necesario reconsiderar el tratamiento actual de las infecciones fúngicas invasoras.
Clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of invasive Aspergillus infections in adults in the Middle East region: Expert panel recommendations
2014, Journal of Infection and Public Health
The incidence of invasive Aspergillus infections in the Middle East continues to rise with the increase in the number of immunocompromised patients, and carries significant morbidity and mortality. A panel of experts analysed the evidence from the most recent international guidelines and relevant published literature to reach consensus and develop clear clinical practice guidelines to aid diagnosis and treatment of invasive Aspergillus infections in the Middle East. Disease-specific recommendations were provided for the management of invasive aspergillosis. The expert panel acknowledged that these guidelines should be followed as closely as possible but used alongside clinical judgement.
Antifungal pre-emptive strategy for high-risk neutropenic patients: Why the story is still ongoing
2014, Clinical Microbiology and Infection
Citation Excerpt :
To avoid the onset of IFD in neutropenic patients, three approaches have been developed, which are often combined: antifungal prophylaxis, empirical antifungal therapy and pre-emptive antifungal approaches. Before efficient antifungal prophylaxis was available, and before indirect biological markers and effective imaging were assessed, the only acceptable approach was empirical antifungal therapy in patients with persistent or recurrent unexplained fever refractory to broad-spectrum antibiotics [7,8]. The present manuscript will review the development of pre-emptive antifungal approaches in high-risk neutropenic patients.
Neutropenic patients with haematological malignancies are at high risk of invasive fungal disease (IFD). Due to limitations in specific procedures to establish an early diagnosis of IFD, two historical unpowered studies suggested, three decades ago, that giving an empirical antifungal treatment to patients with persistent or recurrent fever under broad‐spectrum antibacterials, could reduce the risk of IFD. For cost and toxicity reasons, this strategy became debated when modern imaging and indirect biological markers became available. Different pre‐emptive strategies, either based on lung imaging, galactomannan antigenaemia, fungal PCR, or a combination of several parameters, were designed with the goal of restricting the administration of antifungals to the more at‐risk patients with early signs of IFD. Almost all pre‐emptive studies showed or suggested a reduction of administration and cost of antifungals during neutropenic phases. However, the clinical pertinence and safety of the strategy, and mainly its optimal design, are still pending. This paper reviews the evolution of these strategies and how they may be implemented in the haematology ward.
Acute Invasive Pulmonary Aspergillosis: Clinical Presentation and Treatment
2024, Seminars in Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine
Empiric vs Preemptive Antifungal Strategy in High-Risk Neutropenic Patients on Fluconazole Prophylaxis: A Randomized Trial of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer
2023, Clinical Infectious Diseases

View all citing articles on Scopus

^∗: A complete list of the members of this group appears at the end of the article.

View full text

Clinical studyEmpiric antifungal therapy in febrile granulocytopenic patients

Abstract

J Chronic Dis

Clin Haematol

Am J Med

Am J Med

Am J Med

Am J Med

Fungal infection in acute leukemia

Cancer

Causes of death in febrile granulocytopenic cancer patients receiving empiric antibiotic therapy

Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol

Clinical study
Empiric antifungal therapy in febrile granulocytopenic patients