MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1093/cid/ciac623

Медицинская библиотека · Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2023

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.

Maertens Johan, Lodewyck Tom, Donnelly J Peter, Chantepie Sylvain, Robin Christine, Blijlevens Nicole, Turlure Pascal, Selleslag Dominik, Baron Frédéric, Aoun Mickael, Heinz Werner J, Bertz Hartmut, Ráčil Zdeněk, Vandercam Bernard, Drgona Lubos, Coiteux Valerie, Llorente Cristina Castilla, Schaefer-Prokop Cornelia, Paesmans Marianne, Ameye Lieveke, Meert Liv, Cheung Kin Jip, Hepler Deborah A, Loeffler Jürgen, Barnes Rosemary, Marchetti Oscar, Verweij Paul, Lamoth Frederic, Bochud Pierre-Yves, Schwarzinger Michael, Cordonnier Catherine, Infectious Diseases Group and the Acute Leukemia Group of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer

Рандомизированное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

Empiric antifungal therapy is considered the standard of care for high-risk neutropenic patients with persistent fever. The impact of a preemptive, diagnostic-driven approach based on galactomannan screening and chest computed tomography scan on demand on survival and on the risk of invasive fungal disease (IFD) during the first weeks of high-risk neutropenia is unknown.

METHODS

Patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) or myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant recipients were randomly assigned to receive caspofungin empirically (arm A) or preemptively (arm B), while receiving fluconazole 400 mg daily prophylactically. The primary end point of this noninferiority study was overall survival (OS) 42 days after randomization.

RESULTS

Of 556 patients recruited, 549 were eligible: 275 in arm A and 274 in arm B. Eighty percent of the patients had AML or MDS requiring high-dose chemotherapy, and 93% of them were in the first induction phase. At day 42, the OS was not inferior in arm B (96.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 93.8%-98.3%) when compared with arm A (93.1%; 95% CI, 89.3%-95.5%). The rates of IFDs at day 84 were not significantly different, 7.7% (95% CI, 4.5%-10.8%) in arm B vs 6.6% (95% CI, 3.6%-9.5%) in arm A. The rate of patients who received caspofungin was significantly lower in arm B (27%) than in arm A (63%; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The preemptive antifungal strategy was safe for high-risk neutropenic patients given fluconazole as prophylaxis, halving the number of patients receiving antifungals without excess mortality or IFDs. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT01288378; EudraCT 2010-020814-27.

Для цитирования: Maertens Johan, Lodewyck Tom, Donnelly J Peter, Chantepie Sylvain, Robin Christine, Blijlevens Nicole, Turlure Pascal, Selleslag Dominik, Baron Frédéric, Aoun Mickael, Heinz Werner J, Bertz Hartmut, Ráčil Zdeněk, Vandercam Bernard, Drgona Lubos, Coiteux Valerie, Llorente Cristina Castilla, Schaefer-Prokop Cornelia, Paesmans Marianne, Ameye Lieveke, Meert Liv, Cheung Kin Jip, Hepler Deborah A, Loeffler Jürgen, Barnes Rosemary, Marchetti Oscar, Verweij Paul, Lamoth Frederic, Bochud Pierre-Yves, Schwarzinger Michael, Cordonnier Catherine, Infectious Diseases Group and the Acute Leukemia Group of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer. 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.. Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America. 2023. DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciac623.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.