Literature DB >> 7799026

Ciprofloxacin versus trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole for prophylaxis of bacterial infections in bone marrow transplant recipients: a randomized, controlled trial.

M A Lew1, K Kehoe, J Ritz, K H Antman, L Nadler, L A Kalish, R Finberg.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of ciprofloxacin (CIP) and trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (TMS) for the prevention of bacterial infections in patients who received bone marrow transplantation (BMT) for the treatment of solid and hematopoietic neoplasms. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adult inpatients about to undergo BMT for lymphoma, leukemia, or solid tumors were enrolled onto a prospective, randomized, double-blinded, controlled trial that compared CIP (750 mg orally twice per day) with TMS (160 mg trimethoprim and 800 mg sulfamethoxazole orally twice per day). Subjects were stratified before randomization according to tumor and BMT type. Prophylaxis was begun within 96 hours of initiation of the BMT preparative regimen and continued until the onset of fever, signs or symptoms of infection, serious adverse effects, or recovery of the absolute granulocyte count (AGC) to > or = to 400/microL.
RESULTS: Seventy-five CIP recipients and 71 TMS recipients were assessable for efficacy. No difference was noted between the two groups in occurrence of fever during neutropenia, time to onset of first fever, or overall infection rates. Ten bacteremias occurred in CIP recipients versus six in TMS recipients (P = .43). Ten episodes of Clostridium difficile enterocolitis occurred in TMS recipients versus no episodes in CIP recipients (P = .001). Four infections caused by gram-negative bacilli, including one bacteremia, occurred in TMS recipients versus none in CIP recipients (P = .06). No differences were noted in the incidence of rash or organ toxicity. TMS recipients had longer durations of granulocytopenia at AGC levels < or = to 500/microL and < or = to 100/microL than did CIP recipients (P = .08 for both comparisons). Mean peak and trough serum levels of CIP decreased significantly between weeks 1 and 2 of prophylaxis.
CONCLUSION: CIP and TMS were equally safe and effective in the prevention of bacterial infections in BMT patients when the overall infection rate was used as the principal end point. TMS prophylaxis was associated with a higher incidence of C difficile enterocolitis and infections caused by gram-negative bacilli, as well as a trend toward prolongation of granulocytopenia.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7799026     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.1995.13.1.239

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  16 in total

1.  Lack of ability of ciprofloxacin-rifampin prophylaxis to decrease infection-related morbidity in neutropenic patients given cytotoxic therapy and peripheral blood stem cell transplants.

Authors:  M Hidalgo; J Hornedo; C Lumbreras; J M Trigo; C Gómez; S Perea; A Ruiz; R Hitt; H Cortés-Funes
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1997-05       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 2.  Clostridium difficile infection among hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients: beyond colitis.

Authors:  Carolyn D Alonso; Kieren A Marr
Journal:  Curr Opin Infect Dis       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 4.915

3.  Evaluation of sulfonamide detoxification pathways in haematologic malignancy patients prior to intermittent trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole prophylaxis.

Authors:  Mahmoud Abouraya; James C Sacco; Brad S Kahl; Lauren A Trepanier
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 4.335

4.  Effect of long-term trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole prophylaxis on ascites formation, bacterial translocation, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, and survival in cirrhotic rats.

Authors:  C Guarner; B A Runyon; M Heck; S Young; M Y Sheikh
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 3.199

Review 5.  Prevention of infection due to Pneumocystis spp. in human immunodeficiency virus-negative immunocompromised patients.

Authors:  Martin Rodriguez; Jay A Fishman
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 26.132

6.  Oral antimicrobial prophylaxis in bone marrow transplant recipients: randomized trial of ciprofloxacin versus ciprofloxacin-vancomycin.

Authors:  C D Ford; W Reilly; J Wood; D C Classen; J P Burke
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 7.  Rethinking Antimicrobial Prophylaxis in the Transplant Patient in the World of Emerging Resistant Organisms-Where Are We Today?

Authors:  Lucy E Horton; Nina M Haste; Randy A Taplitz
Journal:  Curr Hematol Malig Rep       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 3.952

Review 8.  [Febrile neutropenia: practical aspects].

Authors:  P Harten; B Seyfarth; N Schmitz
Journal:  Med Klin (Munich)       Date:  1998-10-15

9.  Emergence of fluoroquinolone-resistant Escherichia coli in fecal flora of cancer patients receiving norfloxacin prophylaxis.

Authors:  J Carratala; A Fernandez-Sevilla; F Tubau; M A Dominguez; F Gudiol
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  1996-02       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 10.  Ciprofloxacin. An updated review of its pharmacology, therapeutic efficacy and tolerability.

Authors:  R Davis; A Markham; J A Balfour
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 9.546

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.