Malgorzata Mikulska1, Diana Averbuch2, Frederic Tissot3, Catherine Cordonnier4, Murat Akova5, Thierry Calandra6, Marcello Ceppi7, Paolo Bruzzi7, Claudio Viscoli8. 1. Division of Infectious Diseases, University of Genoa (DISSAL) and Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genoa, Italy. Electronic address: m.mikulska@unige.it. 2. Pediatric Infectious Diseases, Hadassah-Hebrew University Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel. 3. Infectious Diseases Service, Department of Medicine, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois and University of Lausanne, Switzerland. 4. Department of Haematology, Henri Mondor Teaching Hospital, Assistance Publique-hôpitaux de Paris, and Université Paris-Est-Créteil, Créteil, France. 5. Hacettepe University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology, Ankara, Turkey. 6. Infectious Diseases Service, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois and University of Lausanne, Switzerland. 7. Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Clinical Trials Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genoa, Italy. 8. Division of Infectious Diseases, University of Genoa (DISSAL) and Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Genoa, Italy.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Fluoroquinolone (FQ) prophylaxis was recommended in 2005 by European Conference on Infections in Leukemia (ECIL) for patients with prolonged neutropenia. In consideration of a worldwide increase in antibiotic resistance, the issue of FQ prophylaxis during neutropenia was re-evaluated. METHODS: Literature review of randomised controlled trials (RCT) and observational studies published in years 2006-2014 was performed. Their results were analysed in meta-analysis. Meta-regression model was applied to evaluate whether the rates of FQ resistance in community and hospital settings influenced the efficacy of FQ prophylaxis. The impact of FQ prophylaxis on colonisation and infection with resistant bacteria was reviewed. RESULTS: Two RCTs and 12 observational studies were identified. FQ prophylaxis did not have effect on mortality (pooled OR 1.01, 95%CI 0.73-1.41), but was associated with lower rate of bloodstream infections (BSI) (pooled OR 0.57, 95%CI 0.43-0.74) and episodes of fever during neutropenia (pooled OR 0.32, 95%CI 0.20-0.50). No effect of the background rate of FQ resistance on the efficacy of FQ prophylaxis was observed. In few studies, FQ prophylaxis resulted in an increased colonisation or infection with FQ- or multi-drug resistant strains. CONCLUSIONS: The possible benefits of FQ prophylaxis on BSI rate, but not on overall mortality, should be weighed against its impact in terms of toxicity and changes in local ecology in single centres.
OBJECTIVES:Fluoroquinolone (FQ) prophylaxis was recommended in 2005 by European Conference on Infections in Leukemia (ECIL) for patients with prolonged neutropenia. In consideration of a worldwide increase in antibiotic resistance, the issue of FQ prophylaxis during neutropenia was re-evaluated. METHODS: Literature review of randomised controlled trials (RCT) and observational studies published in years 2006-2014 was performed. Their results were analysed in meta-analysis. Meta-regression model was applied to evaluate whether the rates of FQ resistance in community and hospital settings influenced the efficacy of FQ prophylaxis. The impact of FQ prophylaxis on colonisation and infection with resistant bacteria was reviewed. RESULTS: Two RCTs and 12 observational studies were identified. FQ prophylaxis did not have effect on mortality (pooled OR 1.01, 95%CI 0.73-1.41), but was associated with lower rate of bloodstream infections (BSI) (pooled OR 0.57, 95%CI 0.43-0.74) and episodes of fever during neutropenia (pooled OR 0.32, 95%CI 0.20-0.50). No effect of the background rate of FQ resistance on the efficacy of FQ prophylaxis was observed. In few studies, FQ prophylaxis resulted in an increased colonisation or infection with FQ- or multi-drug resistant strains. CONCLUSIONS: The possible benefits of FQ prophylaxis on BSI rate, but not on overall mortality, should be weighed against its impact in terms of toxicity and changes in local ecology in single centres.
Authors: J R de la Court; A H W Bruns; A H E Roukens; I O Baas; K van Steeg; M L Toren-Wielema; M Tersmette; N M A Blijlevens; R A G Huis In 't Veld; T F W Wolfs; W J E Tissing; Y Kyuchukova; J Heijmans Journal: Infect Dis Ther Date: 2022-10-14
Authors: Grace Egan; Paula D Robinson; Juan P D Martinez; Sarah Alexander; Roland A Ammann; L Lee Dupuis; Brian T Fisher; Thomas Lehrnbecher; Bob Phillips; Sandra Cabral; George Tomlinson; Lillian Sung Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2019-07-05 Impact factor: 4.452
Authors: Marie von Lilienfeld-Toal; Jörg Janne Vehreschild; Oliver Cornely; Livio Pagano; Francesca Compagno; Hans H Hirsch Journal: Leukemia Date: 2020-05-01 Impact factor: 11.528
Authors: Enrico Maria Trecarichi; Gabriele Giuliano; Chiara Cattaneo; Stelvio Ballanti; Marianna Criscuolo; Anna Candoni; Francesco Marchesi; Marica Laurino; Michelina Dargenio; Rosa Fanci; Mariagiovanna Cefalo; Mario Delia; Angelica Spolzino; Laura Maracci; Gianpaolo Nadali; Alessandro Busca; Maria Ilaria Del Principe; Rosa Daffini; Edoardo Simonetti; Giulia Dragonetti; Maria Elena Zannier; Livio Pagano; Mario Tumbarello Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-10-29 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Mark T Drayson; Stella Bowcock; Tim Planche; Gulnaz Iqbal; Guy Pratt; Kwee Yong; Jill Wood; Kerry Raynes; Helen Higgins; Bryony Dawkins; David Meads; Claire T Hulme; Irene Monahan; Kamaraj Karunanithi; Helen Dignum; Edward Belsham; Jeff Neilson; Beth Harrison; Anand Lokare; Gavin Campbell; Michael Hamblin; Peter Hawkey; Anna C Whittaker; Eric Low; Janet A Dunn Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2019-10-23 Impact factor: 41.316