Anat Gafter‐Gvili

BACKGROUND: Bacterial infections are a major cause of illness and death in patients who are neutropenic after chemotherapy treatment for cancer. Trials have shown the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis in decreasing the incidence of bacterial infections but not in reducing mortality rates. PURPOSE: To evaluate whether antibiotic prophylaxis in neutropenic patients reduces mortality and incidence of infection and to assess related adverse events. DATA SOURCES: The Cochrane Cancer Network register of trials (2004), The Cochrane Library (Issue 4, 2004), EMBASE (1980-2004), MEDLINE (1966-2004), and references of identified studies. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized, controlled trials comparing antibiotic prophylaxis with placebo or no intervention or another antibiotic in afebrile neutropenic patients. DATA EXTRACTION: Two reviewers independently appraised the quality of trials and extracted data. DATA SYNTHESIS: Ninety-five trials performed between 1973 and 2004 met inclusion criteria. Fifty-two trials addressed quinolone prophylaxis. Antibiotic prophylaxis significantly decreased the risk for death when compared with placebo or no treatment (relative risk, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.55 to 0.81]). All prophylactic antibiotics were associated with an increased risk for adverse events (relative risk, 1.69 [CI, 1.14 to 2.50]). Fluoroquinolone prophylaxis reduced the risk for all-cause mortality (relative risk, 0.52 [CI, 0.35 to 0.77]), as well as infection-related mortality, fever, clinically documented infections, and microbiologically documented infections. Fluoroquinolone prophylaxis increased the risk for harboring bacilli resistant to the specific drug after treatment and adverse events, but these results were not statistically significant (relative risks, 1.69 [CI, 0.73 to 3.92]) and 1.30 [CI, 0.61 to 2.76], respectively). LIMITATIONS: Most trials involved patients with hematologic cancer. Data on all-cause mortality were missing in 10 of 50 trials comparing prophylaxis with no prophylaxis. Effect estimates were larger in trials of unclear methodologic quality compared with trials of adequate methodologic quality. CONCLUSIONS: Antibiotic prophylaxis for neutropenic patients undergoing cytotoxic therapy reduces mortality. Mortality was substantially reduced when analysis was limited to fluoroquinolones. Antibiotic prophylaxis, preferably with a fluoroquinolone, should be considered for neutropenic patients.

BACKGROUND: Bacterial infections are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients who are neutropenic following chemotherapy for malignancy. Trials have shown the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis in reducing the incidence of bacterial infections but not in reducing mortality rates. Our systematic review from 2006 also showed a reduction in mortality. OBJECTIVES: This updated review aimed to evaluate whether there is still a benefit of reduction in mortality when compared to placebo or no intervention. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Cancer Network Register of Trials (2011), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2011), MEDLINE (1966 to March 2011), EMBASE (1980 to March 2011), abstracts of conference proceedings and the references of identified studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs comparing different types of antibiotic prophylaxis with placebo or no intervention, or another antibiotic, to prevent bacterial infections in afebrile neutropenic patients. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently appraised the quality of each trial and extracted data from the included trials. Analyses were performed using RevMan 5.1 software. MAIN RESULTS: One-hundred and nine trials (involving 13,579 patients) that were conducted between the years 1973 to 2010 met the inclusion criteria. When compared with placebo or no intervention, antibiotic prophylaxis significantly reduced the risk of death from all causes (46 trials, 5635 participants; risk ratio (RR) 0.66, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.79) and the risk of infection-related death (43 trials, 5777 participants; RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.77). The estimated number needed to treat (NNT) to prevent one death was 34 (all-cause mortality) and 48 (infection-related mortality).Prophylaxis also significantly reduced the occurrence of fever (54 trials, 6658 participants; RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.87), clinically documented infection (48 trials, 5758 participants; RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.76), microbiologically documented infection (53 trials, 6383 participants; RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.62) and other indicators of infection.There were no significant differences between quinolone prophylaxis and TMP-SMZ prophylaxis with regard to death from all causes or infection, however, quinolone prophylaxis was associated with fewer side effects leading to discontinuation (seven trials, 850 participants; RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.87) and less resistance to the drugs thereafter (six trials, 366 participants; RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.74). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Antibiotic prophylaxis in afebrile neutropenic patients significantly reduced all-cause mortality. In our review, the most significant reduction in mortality was observed in trials assessing prophylaxis with quinolones. The benefits of antibiotic prophylaxis outweighed the harm such as adverse effects and the development of resistance since all-cause mortality was reduced. As most trials in our review were of patients with haematologic cancer, we strongly recommend antibiotic prophylaxis for these patients, preferably with a quinolone. Prophylaxis may also be considered for patients with solid tumours or lymphoma.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of antifungal prophylaxis on all-cause mortality as primary outcome, invasive fungal infections (IFIs), and adverse events. Many studies have evaluated the role of antifungal prophylaxis in cancer patients, with inconsistent conclusions. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials comparing systemic antifungals with placebo, no intervention, or other antifungal agents for prophylaxis in cancer patients after chemotherapy. The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, conference proceedings, and references were searched. Two reviewers independently appraised the quality of trials and extracted data. RESULTS: Sixty-four trials met inclusion criteria. Antifungal prophylaxis decreased all-cause mortality significantly at end of follow-up compared with placebo, no treatment, or nonsystemic antifungals (relative risk [RR], 0.84; 95% CI, 0.74 to 0.95). In allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT) recipients, prophylaxis reduced all-cause mortality (RR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.85), fungal-related mortality, and documented IFI. In acute leukemia patients, there was a significant reduction in fungal-related mortality and documented IFI, whereas the difference in mortality was only borderline significant (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.06). Prophylaxis with itraconazole suspension reduced documented IFI when compared with fluconazole, with no difference in survival, and at the cost of more adverse events. On the basis of two studies, posaconazole prophylaxis reduced all-cause mortality (RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.98), fungal-related mortality, and IFI when compared with fluconazole. CONCLUSION: Antifungal prophylaxis decreases all-cause mortality significantly in patients after chemotherapy. Antifungal prophylaxis should be administered to patients undergoing allogeneic HSCT, and should probably be administered to high-risk acute leukemia patients.