Treatment of community-onset pneumonia in neutropenic cancer patients: β-lactam monotherapy versus combination antibiotic regimens.

Background

Febrile neutropenia, an inevitable side effect of chemotherapy, contributes to high mortality among cancer patients [ 1 ]. Among various clinical presentations of febrile neutropenia, pneumonia is considered high-risk [ 2 ]. Guidelines do not specify empirical antibiotics for the treatment of neutropenic pneumonia, i.e. community-onset pneumonia with febrile neutropenia. Although the European Society for Medical Oncology guidelines recommend coverage of atypical pathogens by adding macrolide antibiotics in managing neutropenic pneumonia, the level of evidence and grade of recommendation are very low [ 3 ]. Most clinicians choose a combination of an antipseudomonal β-lactam with azithromycin or fluoroquinolone targeting neutropenic fever and community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). However, the indiscriminate use of macrolide or fluoroquinolone in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy may result in unexpected side effects such as cardiovascular events and acquisition of resistance [ 4 – 7 ]. This study aimed to answer the question of whether combination therapy is necessary in patients with neutropenic pneumonia.

In the case of CAP, there has been already controversy about whether to start combination therapy as empirical antibiotics. The addition of macrolide or fluoroquinolone is based on the treatment for an atypical pathogen, antibiotic synergism, and anti-inflammatory effect. However, several studies have shown that β-lactam monotherapy is non-inferior to combination therapy [ 8 – 10 ]. Some have suggested that monotherapy may be considered in patients with low-risk CAP [ 11 , 12 ]. Likewise, questions may arise as to whether combination therapy should be considered when neutropenic pneumonia is diagnosed in cancer patients who are receiving chemotherapy but with good performance status. To further investigate this question, we compared the effects of combination antibiotic regimens to those of β-lactam monotherapy in cancer patients with community-onset neutropenic pneumonia who were managed at a tertiary care center during a 20-year period.

Methods

Study design and population

A retrospective cohort study was conducted to compare the effects of combination antibiotic regimens to those of β-lactam monotherapy for the treatment of community-onset pneumonia in neutropenic cancer patients. We reviewed the electronic medical records of individuals who were admitted and diagnosed with pneumonia between March 1995 and February 2015 at Samsung Medical Center, a 1950-bed tertiary care university hospital in Seoul, Republic of Korea. Adult (age ≥ 18 years) cancer patients who were diagnosed with community-onset neutropenic pneumonia during the study period were included in the analysis. We exclusively included chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in the present study, and underlying cancers included solid cancers, lymphoma, and multiple myeloma. Hematologic malignancies such as acute leukemia, aplastic anemia, or myelodysplastic syndrome that accompany prolonged neutropenia due to intensive chemotherapy or the nature of the disease, were excluded from the analysis because prolonged neutropenia, a strong prognostic factor of febrile neutropenia, may obscure the effect of antibiotics [ 1 , 13 , 14 ]. Patients with lymphoma and multiple myeloma who underwent bone marrow transplantation were also excluded for the same reason. The study population was divided into two groups according to antibiotic regimen. Patients who were re-admitted 7 days after discharge were excluded because they were assumed to have hospital-acquired pneumonia. The combination group included patients who were treated with a combination of a β-lactam and a macrolide or fluoroquinolone, and the β-lactam group included patients who received β-lactam therapy only. Additional use of other classes of antibiotics that do not have activity for atypical bacterial pathogens, such as aminoglycosides or vancomycin, was not considered when classifying study groups. The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality, and secondary outcomes were 90-day all-cause mortality, length of hospital stay, and complications. The study protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Samsung Medical Center.

Data collection

Retrospectively collected data included demographics, underlying diseases, clinical presentations and outcomes, laboratory test results, types and duration of antibiotic therapy, and microbiologic data. Microbiologic data included cultures of blood and respiratory specimens, pneumococcal and Legionella urinary antigen, influenza antigen, and mycoplasma antibody. The severity of neutropenic pneumonia was estimated using the CURB-65 score and the Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) risk index [ 15 , 16 ].

Definitions

Pneumonia was defined as the presence of parenchymal infiltration on chest radiography (newly appeared infiltration or aggravation of preexisting lesions) with relevant respiratory symptoms, including cough, sputum production, shortness of breath, or pleuritic chest pain [ 17 ]. Pneumonia was considered to be of community-onset if it developed in the community or within 48 h after hospital admission [ 17 , 18 ]. Neutropenia was defined as an absolute neutrophil count < 500 cells/mm 3 or an absolute neutrophil count expected to decrease to < 500 cells/mm 3 during the next 48 h [ 2 ]. Fever was defined as body temperature ≥ 38.0 °C. The response to chemotherapy was evaluated according to the World Health Organization criteria or Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors guidelines [ 19 – 21 ]. The mycoplasma antibody test was considered positive if a single titer was highly elevated (≥1:320) or a four-fold increase in the titer was detected in a follow-up sample [ 22 ].

Statistical analyses

The sample size calculation for the study resulted in a sample size of 134 patients who were to be in a 1:1 allocation ratio to achieve a power of 95%. To compare the two groups, the Pearson χ 2 test and Fisher’s exact test were used for categorical variables, and Student’s t -test and the Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables. The Cox proportional hazard model was used to examine the associations of the antibiotic regimens with 30- and 90-day mortality in neutropenic pneumonia after adjusting for potential confounding factors. All collected variables with any relevance to outcomes were evaluated by univariate analysis, and those with statistical significance were included in the multivariate analysis. All P -values were two-tailed, and those < 0.05 were considered to be statistically significant. All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS Statistics version 20.0 for Windows (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA).

Results

Baseline characteristics, antibiotic types, severity, and cancer status of neutropenic pneumonia

During the study period, 165 cancer patients with community-onset neutropenic pneumonia were identified: 72 were classified in the β-lactam group and 93 in the combination group. Blood cultures were performed in 100% of the enrolled patients and cultures of lower respiratory specimens in 99.0% of the patients. Causative pathogens of neutropenic pneumonia were identified in 27.9% of the patients, of which Streptococcus pneumoniae was the most common followed by Pseudomonas aeruginosa , Staphylococcus aureus , and Klebsiella pneumoniae (23.9, 19.6, 15.2, and 13.0%, respectively; Additional file 1 : Table S1). Serologic tests for Mycoplasma pneumoniae were conducted in 20 patients (12.1%), two of which yielded positive results. The urinary antigen tests for legionella were performed in 75 patients (45.5%), and all showed results. No patient received oral prophylactic antibiotics before the onset of neutropenic fever.

The baseline characteristics, types of antibiotics, and the severity of neutropenic pneumonia are presented in Table 1 . Baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups, except for male predominance in the β-lactam group and a higher prevalence of chronic renal disease in the combination group. Ceftazidime was used more frequently in the β-lactam group, while piperacillin-tazobactam was used more in the combination group. Ceftazidime was administered with tobramycin for an initial 3–5 days, and 23.6% of the β-lactam group and 19.4% of the combination group used an initial vancomycin combination ( P = 0.507). In the combination group, azithromycin was most frequently used for coverage of atypical pathogens, followed by levofloxacin, ciprofloxacin, and moxifloxacin (75.3, 11.8, 8.6, and 4.3%, respectively). The duration of antibiotic administration was similar between the two groups. Severity variables, including the presence of bacteremia, duration of neutropenia, C-reactive protein (CRP) level, CURB-65 score, and MASCC risk index were not statistically different between the two groups (all P > 0.05). Table 1 Baseline characteristics, types of β-lactams, and severity of patients with neutropenic pneumonia Variables β-lactam group ( n = 72) Combination group ( n = 93) P -value Demographic data Age, years 61 ± 11 62 ± 10 0.296 Male sex 59 (81.9%) 59 (63.4%) 0.009 Smoking history 29 (40.3%) 27 (29.0%) 0.130 Comorbid conditions Hypertension 14 (19.4%) 28 (30.1%) 0.119 Diabetes mellitus 5 (6.9%) 12 (12.9%) 0.212 Cardiovascular diseases 5 (6.9%) 2 (2.2%) 0.130 Chronic lung diseases 3 (4.2%) 6 (6.5%) 0.733 Chronic liver diseases 3 (4.2%) 3 (3.2%) 1.000 Chronic renal diseases 0 (0.0%) 6 (6.5%) 0.036 Types of β-lactams Cefepime 40 (55.6%) 64 (68.8%) 0.080 Ceftazidime a 20 (27.8%) 2 (2.2%) < 0.001 Piperacillin/tazobactam 6 (8.3%) 21 (22.6%) 0.014 Carbapenem 6 (8.3%) 6 (6.5%) 0.644 Duration of antibiotic administration, days 12.4 (8.9–16.2) 11.7 (9.1–14.4) 0.646 Severity variables Presence of bacteremia 16 (22.0%) 12 (12.9%) 0.114 Duration of neutropenia, days 1.5 (0.9–3.1) 1.4 (1.0–2.9) 0.773 CRP, mg/dL 15.9 (6.5–24.0) 17.0 (6.4–25.9) 0.669 CURB-65 1 (0–2) 1 (0–2) 0.898 MASCC risk index 16 (13–18) 16 (16–21) 0.059 Data are expressed as number (%) of patients, mean ± SD, or median (IQR) a Ceftazidime was administered with tobramycin for an initial 3–5 days Abbreviations: CRP C-reactive protein, MASCC Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer, SD Standard deviation, IQR interquartile range

Types and status of cancers in patients with neutropenic pneumonia were not differently distributed between the two groups (Table 2 , all P > 0.05). Lung cancer was the most common type of cancer, followed by lymphoma and breast cancer (44.8, 14.6, and 11.5%, respectively). Sixty-seven patients (40.6%) received chemotherapy for curative purposes, while the remainders (59.4%) were in palliative settings. Among patients in palliative settings, more than half (54.1%) experienced progression or relapse of underlying cancers despite previous chemotherapy. Table 2 Types and status of cancers in patients with neutropenic pneumonia Variables β-lactam group ( n = 72) Combination group ( n = 93) P -value Type of cancer Head and neck 3 (4.2%) 1 (1.1%) 0.319 Lung 36 (50.0%) 38 (40.9%) 0.242 Breast 7 (9.7%) 12 (12.9%) 0.526 Esophageal and gastric 8 (11.1%) 6 (6.5%) 0.287 Colorectal 1 (1.4%) 5 (5.4%) 0.233 Hepatobiliary and pancreatic 0 (0.0%) 3 (3.2%) 0.258 Bladder 1 (1.4%) 5 (5.4%) 0.233 Prostate 0 (0.0%) 4 (4.3%) 0.133 Melanoma and sarcoma 1 (1.4%) 5 (5.4%) 0.233 Lymphoma and myeloma 15 (20.8%) 13 (14.0%) 0.245 Cancer status Curative setting 32 (44.4%) 35 (37.6%) 0.377 Neoadjuvant and adjuvant 12 (16.7%) 20 (21.5%) 0.436 Definitive 20 (27.8%) 15 (16.1%) 0.069 Palliative setting a 40 (55.6%) 58 (62.4%) 0.377 Complete response 1 (2.5%) 0 (0.0%) 0.436 Partial response 2 (5.0%) 4 (6.9%) 0.697 Stable disease 0 (0.0%) 4 (6.9%) 0.133 Progressed or relapse 22 (55%) 31 (53.4%) 0.705 Before evaluation 15 (37.5%) 19 (32.8%) 0.949 Data are expressed as number (%) of patients a The response to chemotherapy was evaluated according to the World Health Organization (WHO) criteria or Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) guidelines

Outcomes and complications of patients with neutropenic pneumonia

The outcomes and complications of patients with neutropenic pneumonia are summarized in Table 3 . In the β-lactam group, 30-day (15.3% versus 4.3%, P = 0.015) and 90-day all-cause mortality (20.8% versus 7.5%, P = 0.013) were significantly higher. Length of hospital stay, pneumonia recurrence, and complications and adverse effects, including complicated pleural effusion, Clostridium difficile -associated colitis, and cardiac events, were similar between the two groups (all P > 0.05). Table 3 Outcomes and complications of patients with neutropenic pneumonia Variables β-lactam group ( n = 72) Combination group ( n = 93) P -value 30-day all-cause mortality 11 (15.3%) 4 (4.3%) 0.015 90-day all-cause mortality 15 (20.8%) 7 (7.5%) 0.013 Length of hospital stay, days 5.7 (4.4–10.9) 6.0 (4.3–8.6) 0.632 Recurrence of pneumonia a 4 (5.6%) 3 (3.2%) 0.700 Complications and adverse effects a Complicated pleural effusion 1 (1.4%) 2 (2.2%) 1.000 CDAD 3 (4.2%) 0 (0.0%) 0.081 Cardiac events b 4 (5.6%) 4 (4.3%) 0.730 Others c 8 (11.4%) 7 (7.5%) 0.394 Data are expressed as number (%) of patients or median (IQR) a Within 90 days b Cardiac events included arrhythmia, heart failure, and myocardial infarction c Others included diarrhea, gastrointestinal bleeding, pneumothorax, epilepsy, and back pain Abbreviations: CDAD Clostridium difficile -associated diarrhea, IQR interquartile range

To identify potential confounding factors of 30-day all-cause mortality, all relevant variables were evaluated in a univariate fashion using the Cox proportional hazard model (Table 4 ). Underlying lung cancer, palliative setting, neutropenia duration, CRP level, MASCC risk index, combination therapy, and the usage of cefepime and carbapenem were statistically significant factors of 30-day all-cause mortality in the univariate analysis. In the multivariate analysis of these variables, combination therapy did not maintain a significant association (hazard ratio [HR] 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.20–3.67; P = 0.827). Duration of neutropenia (HR 1.27, 95% CI 1.05–1.53; P = 0.013), CRP level (HR 1.06, 95% CI 1.00–1.11; P = 0.021), and MASCC risk index (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.65–0.99; P = 0.042) were persistent statistically significant factors of 30-day all-cause mortality. A multivariate analysis for 90-day all-cause mortality was performed (Additional file 2 : Table S2). Combination therapy was not significantly associated with 90-day all-cause mortality (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.23–2.76; P = 0.449), while palliative setting of chemotherapy (HR 12.81, 95% CI 1.78–92.20; P = 0.011), duration of neutropenia (HR 1.16, 95% CI 1.07–1.25; P = < 0.001), CRP level (HR 1.05, 95% CI 1.01–1.09; P = 0.020), and MASCC index (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.72–0.98; P = 0.024) were statistically related to 90-day all-cause mortality. Table 4 Multivariate analysis of 30-day all-cause mortality due to neutropenic pneumonia Variables Univariate analysis Multivariate analysis HR (95% CI) P -value HR (95% CI) P -value Lung cancer 3.55 (1.13–11.15) 0.030 1.60 (0.30–8.63) 0.586 Palliative setting 4.83 (1.09–21.43) 0.038 58.61 (0.26–13,356.90) 0.142 Duration of neutropenia 1.08 (1.03–1.15) 0.003 1.27 (1.05–1.53) 0.013 CRP 1.04 (1.00–1.08) 0.035 1.06 (1.00–1.11) 0.021 MASCC risk index 0.80 (0.68–0.95) 0.010 0.80 (0.65–0.99) 0.042 Combination therapy 0.27 (0.09–0.85) 0.025 0.85 (0.20–3.67) 0.827 Types of β-lactams Cefepime 0.28 (0.10–0.81) 0.019 0.64 (0.17–2.46) 0.518 Ceftazidime 2.05 (0.58–7.25) 0.268 Piperacillin-tazobactam 1.42 (0.40–5.02) 0.589 Carbapenem 5.95 (1.89–18.70) 0.002 0.28 (0.01–50.00) 0.631 Abbreviations: CI confidence interval, CRP C-reactive protein, HR hazard ratio, MASCC Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer

Subgroup analysis of cefepime-treated patients with neutropenic pneumonia

Although we performed a multivariate analysis to adjust for potential confounding factors, the types of β-lactams were significantly unbalanced between the two groups. To verify the effect of combination therapy on all-cause mortality due to neutropenic pneumonia, we also performed a subgroup analysis controlling for β-lactam antibiotics, specifically cefepime which made up the highest proportion among the various β-lactams (63.0%). The same variables used in the analysis of the original cohort were included in the multivariate analyses for 30- and 90-day all-cause mortality. In the multivariate analyses of the cefepime-treated subgroup, combination therapy was not significantly associated with either 30-day (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.06–9.18; P = 0.965) or 90-day all-cause mortality (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.18–3.45; P = 0.741).

Discussion

This study showed that neither monotherapy nor combination therapy was associated with 30- and 90-day mortality in the treatment of neutropenic pneumonia. Although 30-day and 90-day all-cause mortality were higher in the β-lactam group than in the combination group before adjustment, this finding suggests that more patients in the β-lactam group had confounding factors for poor prognosis, including lung cancer, longer duration of neutropenia, or bacteremia, than patients in the combination group.

To our knowledge, this is the first study to compare the clinical efficacy of monotherapy and combination therapy in the treatment of neutropenic pneumonia, extending the concept of CAP. It has been already argued that monotherapy is sufficient for mild cases of CAP without neutropenia [ 11 , 12 ]. The reasons for combination treatment is to cover atypical pathogens, antibiotics synergism, or anti-inflammatory effects. However, in fact, the proportion of atypical pathogens is known to be low in non-critically ill patients with CAP [ 8 , 23 ]. A lack of synergistic effect between macrolide and β-lactam against S. pneumoniae has been described [ 24 – 26 ]. To date, no studies have shown the direct association between combination therapy and anti-inflammatory effect. Several studies have proven that β-lactam monotherapy is non-inferior to combination treatment [ 8 – 10 , 26 ].

The concept that combination treatment may be unnecessary can be applied to neutropenic pneumonia. Cancer patients are at high risk for adverse drug reactions such as gastrointestinal and cardiogenic toxicity. In addition, cancer patients are more likely to be colonized with multi-drug resistant organisms with exposure to antibiotics. These problems can be overcome without the use of unnecessary antibiotics. This study showed that the rate of atypical pathogens was low although not all patients were examined. β-lactam monotherapy was not associated with 30- and 90-day mortality in the multivariate analysis. Rather, predictable variables such as duration of neutropenia, CRP level, and MASCC risk index were associated with mortality in neutropenic pneumonia. This result may support the fact that monotherapy is sufficient in non-critically ill patients with neutropenic pneumonia.

Due to the extended study period of 20 years, there were considerable differences in the types of β-lactams between the two groups. The preferred regimen for neutropenic pneumonia at our center was changed from ceftazidime combined with tobramycin to cefepime after 2002 due to increasing ceftazidime-resistance [ 27 ]. Instead of a tobramycin combination, clinicians tended to select either a macrolide or fluoroquinolone combinations to cover atypical pathogens in neutropenic pneumonia. As these changes in preferred regimens depending on the period may have introduced some bias, we performed a subgroup analysis of cefepime-treated patients, and also found no difference in outcomes between the two groups, supporting the results of the main cohort.

There are several limitations to our study. First, the 20-year study period may lead to heterogeneity in the study population. However, we inevitably expanded the study period to obtain statistical significance in comparing the two groups. We conducted both multivariate analyses to adjust for potential confounding factors and subgroup analysis of cefepime-treated patients to overcome this limitation. Second, as a limitation of retrospective studies, certain criteria have not been applied to the selection of the antibiotics, and the test results for diagnosis of pneumonia. Finally, screening for atypical pathogens was not performed in all patients and the Legionella test in this study covered only serotype 1. This is also the limitation of retrospective study, and efforts to find causative organisms of pneumonia through the tests including urinary antigen detection, respiratory virus PCR panels, sputum cultures are needed. Additional prospective studies are needed to modify this limitation.

In conclusion, this study revealed no differences in 30- and 90-day mortality between β-lactam monotherapy and combination therapy in cancer patients with non-severe community-onset neutropenic pneumonia. Monotherapy can reduce the chance of unwanted drug adverse reactions and acquisition of antibiotic resistance. Unnecessary combination therapy should be reconsidered in neutropenic pneumonia. Future studies are needed with better evaluations for atypical pathogens.

Additional files

Additional file 1: Table S1. Causative pathogens of neutropenic pneumonia. (DOCX 15 kb) Additional file 2: Table S2. . Multivariate analysis of 90-day all-cause mortality due to neutropenic pneumonia. (DOCX 15 kb)

Abbreviations

Community-acquired pneumonia

Confidence interval

C-reactive protein

Hazard ratio

Multinational association for supportive care in cancer

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Hyeri Seok and Jae-Hoon Ko contributed equally to this work.

Authors’ contributions

All authors have read and approved the manuscript. The authors were solely responsible for the conception and performance of the study and for writing this manuscript. Conceptualization: HS, JHK, KRP. Data collection: HS, JYK, JHL, GEP. Data analysis: HS, JHK, KRP, SYC, CIK. Writing original draft: HS, JHK. Writing review & editing: HS, JHK, KRP, JYK, JHL, GEP, SYC, CIK, NYL, DRC.

Funding

No funding was provided for this study.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors of this manuscript have conflicts of interest to disclose as described by BMC Infectious Diseases .

References

1. Kuderer NM Dale DC Crawford J Cosler LE Lyman GH Mortality, morbidity, and cost associated with febrile neutropenia in adult cancer patients Cancer 2006 106 10 2258 2266 10.1002/cncr.21847 16575919

2. Freifeld AG Bow EJ Sepkowitz KA Boeckh MJ Ito JI Mullen CA Clinical practice guideline for the use of antimicrobial agents in neutropenic patients with cancer: 2010 update by the infectious diseases society of america Clin Infect Dis 2011 52 4 e56 e93 10.1093/cid/cir073 21258094

3. de Naurois J Novitzky-Basso I Gill MJ Marti FM Cullen MH Roila F Management of febrile neutropenia: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines Ann Oncol 2010 21 Suppl 5 v252 v256 10.1093/annonc/mdq196 20555092

4. Fuller JD Low DE A review of Streptococcus pneumoniae infection treatment failures associated with fluoroquinolone resistance Clin Infect Dis 2005 41 1 118 121 10.1086/430829 15937772

5. Malhotra-Kumar S Lammens C Coenen S Van Herck K Goossens H Effect of azithromycin and clarithromycin therapy on pharyngeal carriage of macrolide-resistant streptococci in healthy volunteers: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study Lancet 2007 369 9560 482 490 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60235-9 17292768

6. Ray WA Murray KT Hall K Arbogast PG Stein CM Azithromycin and the risk of cardiovascular death N Engl J Med 2012 366 20 1881 1890 10.1056/NEJMoa1003833 22591294 PMC3374857

7. Schembri S Williamson PA Short PM Singanayagam A Akram A Taylor J Cardiovascular events after clarithromycin use in lower respiratory tract infections: analysis of two prospective cohort studies Bmj 2013 346 f1235 10.1136/bmj.f1235 23525864

8. Postma DF van Werkhoven CH van Elden LJ Thijsen SF Hoepelman AI Kluytmans JA Antibiotic treatment strategies for community-acquired pneumonia in adults N Engl J Med 2015 372 14 1312 1323 10.1056/NEJMoa1406330 25830421

9. van der Eerden MM Boersma WG Single versus combination antibiotic therapy in adults hospitalised with community-acquired pneumonia Thorax 2013 68 11 1068 23908129 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2013-203994

10. Eliakim-Raz N, Robenshtok E, Shefet D, Gafter-Gvili A, Vidal L, Paul M, et al. Empiric antibiotic coverage of atypical pathogens for community-acquired pneumonia in hospitalized adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;(9):Cd004418. 10.1002/14651858.CD004418.pub4 PMC7017099 22972070

11. Burki TK Beta-lactam monotherapy is non-inferior to combination treatment for community-acquired pneumonia Lancet Respir Med 2015 3 5 347 10.1016/S2213-2600(15)00148-4 25892353

12. Prina E Ranzani OT Torres A Community-acquired pneumonia Lancet 2015 386 9998 1097 1108 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60733-4 26277247 PMC7173092

13. Crawford J Dale DC Lyman GH Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia: risks, consequences, and new directions for its management Cancer 2004 100 2 228 237 10.1002/cncr.11882 14716755

14. Lopez-Pousa A Rifa J Casas de Tejerina A Gonzalez-Larriba JL Iglesias C Gasquet JA Risk assessment model for first-cycle chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in patients with solid tumours Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 2010 19 5 648 655 10.1111/j.1365-2354.2009.01121.x 20088918 PMC3082427

15. Lim WS van der Eerden MM Laing R Boersma WG Karalus N Town GI Defining community acquired pneumonia severity on presentation to hospital: an international derivation and validation study Thorax 2003 58 5 377 382 10.1136/thorax.58.5.377 12728155 PMC1746657

16. Klastersky J Paesmans M Rubenstein EB Boyer M Elting L Feld R The multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer risk index: a multinational scoring system for identifying low-risk febrile neutropenic cancer patients J Clin Oncol 2000 18 16 3038 3051 10.1200/JCO.2000.18.16.3038 10944139

17. Mandell LA Wunderink RG Anzueto A Bartlett JG Campbell GD Dean NC Infectious Diseases Society of America/American Thoracic Society consensus guidelines on the management of community-acquired pneumonia in adults Clin Infect Dis 2007 44 Suppl 2 S27 S72 10.1086/511159 17278083 PMC7107997

18. American Thoracic S Infectious diseases Society of a. guidelines for the management of adults with hospital-acquired, ventilator-associated, and healthcare-associated pneumonia Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2005 171 4 388 416 10.1164/rccm.200405-644ST 15699079

19. Therasse P Arbuck SG Eisenhauer EA Wanders J Kaplan RS Rubinstein L New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada J Natl Cancer Inst 2000 92 3 205 216 10.1093/jnci/92.3.205 10655437

20. Miller AB Hoogstraten B Staquet M Winkler A Reporting results of cancer treatment Cancer 1981 47 1 207 214 10.1002/1097-0142(19810101)47:1<207::AID-CNCR2820470134>3.0.CO;2-6 7459811

21. Eisenhauer EA Therasse P Bogaerts J Schwartz LH Sargent D Ford R New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1) Eur J Cancer 2009 45 2 228 247 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.10.026 19097774

22. Daxboeck F Krause R Wenisch C Laboratory diagnosis of mycoplasma pneumoniae infection Clin Microbiol Infect 2003 9 4 263 273 10.1046/j.1469-0691.2003.00590.x 12667235

23. van der Eerden MM Vlaspolder F de Graaff CS Groot T Jansen HM Boersma WG Value of intensive diagnostic microbiological investigation in low- and high-risk patients with community-acquired pneumonia Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2005 24 4 241 249 10.1007/s10096-005-1316-8 15902529

24. Lin E Stanek RJ Mufson MA Lack of synergy of erythromycin combined with penicillin or cefotaxime against Streptococcus pneumoniae in vitro Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2003 47 3 1151 1153 10.1128/AAC.47.3.1151-1153.2003 12604560 PMC149295

25. Johansen HK Jensen TG Dessau RB Lundgren B Frimodt-Moller N Antagonism between penicillin and erythromycin against Streptococcus pneumoniae in vitro and in vivo J Antimicrob Chemother 2000 46 6 973 980 10.1093/jac/46.6.973 11102417

26. Dwyer R Ortqvist A Aufwerber E Henriques Normark B Marrie TJ Mufson MA Addition of a macrolide to a ss-lactam in bacteremic pneumococcal pneumonia Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2006 25 8 518 521 10.1007/s10096-006-0183-2 16896822

27. Hughes WT Armstrong D Bodey GP Bow EJ Brown AE Calandra T 2002 guidelines for the use of antimicrobial agents in neutropenic patients with cancer Clin Infect Dis 2002 34 6 730 751 10.1086/339215 11850858