| Literature DB >> 35223707 |
Olga Zajac-Spychala1, Stefanie Kampmeier2, Thomas Lehrnbecher3, Andreas H Groll4.
Abstract
Haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in paediatric patients with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) is associated with a variety of infectious complications which result in significant morbidity and mortality. These patients are profoundly immunocompromised, and immune reconstitution after HSCT generally occurs in astrictly defined order. During the early phase after HSCT until engraftment, patients are at risk of infections due to presence of neutropenia and mucosal damage, with Gramme-positive and Gramme-negative bacteria and fungi being the predominant pathogens. After neutrophil recovery, the profound impairment of cell-mediated immunity and use of glucocorticosteroids for control of graft-vs.-host disease (GvHD) increases the risk of invasive mould infection and infection or reactivation of various viruses, such as cytomegalovirus, varicella zoster virus, Epstein-Barr virus and human adenovirus. In the late phase, characterised by impaired cellular and humoral immunity, particularly in conjunction with chronic GvHD, invasive infections with encapsulated bacterial infections are observed in addition to fungal and viral infections. HSCT also causes a loss of pretransplant naturally acquired and vaccine-acquired immunity; therefore, complete reimmunization is necessary to maintain long-term health in these patients. During the last two decades, major advances have been made in our understanding of and in the control of infectious complications associated with HSCT. In this article, we review current recommendations for the diagnosis, prophylaxis and treatment of infectious complications following HSCT for ALL in childhood.Entities:
Keywords: acute lymphoblastic leukaemia; bacteria; fungus; haematopoietic stem cell transplantation; infection; virus
Year: 2022 PMID: 35223707 PMCID: PMC8866305 DOI: 10.3389/fped.2021.782530
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Pediatr ISSN: 2296-2360 Impact factor: 3.418
Figure 1Illustrative chronology of infectious complications after allogeneic HSCT. Greater depth of colour indicates more common infections. PTLD, post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease; HSCT, haematopoietic stem cell transplantation.
Risk factors for bacterial infectious complications.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Antibacterial prophylaxis | Whereas systemic antibacterial prophylaxis may be considered in children with AML and relapsed ALL receiving intensive chemotherapy, this recommendation is not given for neutropenic children undergoing HSCT (Weak recommendation; high-quality evidence) | Recommendations based on the results of a systematic review of randomised trials of systemic antibacterial prophylaxis (Egan Cancer Med 2019) | Lehrnbecher et al. ( |
| Routine antibacterial prophylaxis for paediatric patients with neutropenia during the pre-engraftment stage of HCT is not recommended (grade D recommendation, level of evidence III) | Recommendation by ECIL-8 based on data from randomised trials and meta-analyses, information from long-term observational studies on resistance | Lehrnbecher et al. ( | |
| Empirical antibacterial therapy | a. Use monotherapy with an antipseudomonal b-lactam, a fourth-generation cephalosporin, or a carbapenem as empirical therapy in paediatric high-risk FN (strong recommendation, high-quality evidence) | International Paediatric Fever and Neutropenia Guideline Panel includes representation from paediatric oncology, infectious diseases, nursing, and pharmacy, as well as a patient advocate and a guideline methodologist from 10 different countries | Lehrnbecher et al. ( |
| Clinically stable patients at low risk of resistant infections: monotherapy with an antipseudomonal non-carbapenem β-lactam and β-lactamase inhibitor combination, or with fourth-generation cephalosporin (grade A recommendation, level of evidence IIr) | ECIL-8 recommendations | Lehrnbecher et al. ( | |
| Therapy of documented bacterial infection | If a causative pathogen is identified, the patient should be treated according to the causative organism identified (assuming it is a plausible pathogen). the choice of which should be guided by | ECIL-8 recommendations | Lehrnbecher et al. ( |
| Prophylaxis of fungal infections | Primary antifungal prophylaxis is strongly recommended for patients undergoing allogeneic HCT in the pre-engraftment and in the post-engraftment phase until immune reconstitution, or in situations of augmented immunosuppressive treatment in the context of graft-vs.-host disease (i.e., use of additional immunosuppressive interventions to control overt graftvs.- host disease, including, but not limited to, the use of glucocorticosteroids in therapeutic doses (≥0·3 mg/kg per day prednisone equivalent) or anti-inflammatory antibodies) (grade A recommendation, level of evidence: IIt). | ECIL-8 recommendations based on risk assessment in paediatric HCT patients and results of interventional studies in adults | Groll et al. ( |
| Administer systemic antifungal prophylaxis to children and adolescents undergoing allogeneic HSCT pre-engraftment and to those receiving systemic immunosuppression for the treatment of graft-vs. host (strong recommendation, moderate quality evidence). | Recommendations developed by an international multidisciplinary panel on the basis of a systematic review of systemic antifungal prophylaxis in children and adults with cancer and HSCT recipients. | Lehrnbecher et al. ( | |
| Empirical antifungal therapy | If empirical therapy is chosen as a strategy, it should be initiated in granulocytopenic patients after 96 h of fever of unclear cause that is unresponsive to broad-spectrum antibacterial agents (grade B recommendation, level of evidence: II) | ECIL-8 recommendation based on clinical trials in paediatric and adult patients. | Groll et al. ( |
| Initiate empirical antifungal therapy in patients with granulocytopenia and prolonged (≥ 96 h) fever unresponsive to broadspectrum antibacterial agents (strong recommendation, high-quality evidence). | Recommendations developed by an international multidisciplinary panel on the basis of a systematic review of empirical management of fever and neutropenia in | Lehrnbecher et al. ( | |
| children and adults with cancer and HSCT recipients. | |||
| Pre-emptive or diagnostic-driven antifungal therapy | If chosen as a strategy, rapid availability of pulmonary CT and galactomannan assay results is a prerequisite and capability of performing bronchoscopies with bronchoalveolar lavage is desirable. The sensitivity of galactomannan in serum might be lower in patients on mould-active prophylaxis (grade B recommendation, level of evidence: II) | ECIL-8 recommendation based on clinical trials in paediatric and adult patients. | Groll et al. ( |
| Therapy of proven or probable fungal infections | Treatment of proven or probable invasive fungal infections include general magament principles including prompt initiation of antifungal therapy, resistance testing, source control and control of predisposing conditions. Echinocandins or liposomal amphotericin B are recommended for the first-line treatment of invasive Candida spp infections before species identification (grade A recommendation, level of evidence: IIt) and intravenous voriconazole (grade A recommendation, level of evidence: IIt)or liposomal amphotericin B (grade B recommendation, level of evidence: IIt) for invasive Aspergillus infections. | ECIL-8 recommendation based on clinical trials in paediatric and adult patients. | Groll et al. ( |
(adapted from Lehrnbecher et al. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol 1997: 19;399–417).
Incidence of adenovirus, CMV and EBV reactivation, disease, pharmacological treatment and rate of treatment response in children after allogeneic HSCT.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Human adenovirus | 15–30% | 6–11% | Cidofovir, brincidofovir | 60–80% |
| CMV | 15–20% | 4% | Ganciclovir, foscarnet, valganciclovir | 70–80% |
| EBV | 11% | 1–7% | Rituximab | 60–70% |
CMV, cytomegalovirus; EBV, Epstein-Barr virus; HSCT, haematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Adapted from Ottoviano et al. (.
Summary of ECIL-8 recommendations for empirical, pre-emptive, and targeted therapy of IFDs (modified from Groll et al. ECIL-8 recommendations; for management of mucormycosis, rare moulds and rare yeast, please see the updated recommendations of the European Confederation of Medical Mycology (ECMM) consortium (91, 92).
|
| |
|---|---|
|
| |
| If chosen as a strategy, | |
| Options approved for this indication include caspofungin or liposomal amphotericin | |
|
| |
| Echinocandins or liposomal amphotericin B are strongly recommended for first line therapy before species identification; | |
| Voriconazole and fluconazole are secondary alternatives in this situation | |
|
| |
| Recommendations for first-line therapy of invasive aspergillosis include voriconazole and liposomal amphotericin B | |
| The combination of voriconazole and an echinocandin is recommended with marginal support in the first-line setting | |