Fever may be the only clinical symptom at the onset of infection in neutropenic cancer patients undergoing myelosuppressive chemotherapy. A prompt and evidence-based diagnostic and therapeutic approach is mandatory. A systematic search of current literature was conducted, including only full papers and excluding allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients. Recommendations for diagnosis and therapy were developed by an expert panel and approved after plenary discussion by the AGIHO. Randomized clinical trials were mainly available for therapeutic decisions, and new diagnostic procedures have been introduced into clinical practice in the past decade. Stratification into a high-risk versus low-risk patient population is recommended. In high-risk patients, initial empirical antimicrobial therapy should be active against pathogens most commonly involved in microbiologically documented and most threatening infections, including Pseudomonas aeruginosa, but excluding coagulase-negative staphylococci. In patients whose expected duration of neutropenia is more than 7 days and who do not respond to first-line antibacterial treatment, specifically in the absence of mold-active antifungal prophylaxis, further therapy should be directed also against fungi, in particular Aspergillus species. With regard to antimicrobial stewardship, treatment duration after defervescence in persistently neutropenic patients must be critically reconsidered and the choice of anti-infective agents adjusted to local epidemiology. This guideline updates recommendations for diagnosis and empirical therapy of fever of unknown origin in adult neutropenic cancer patients in light of the challenges of antimicrobial stewardship.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00277-017-3098-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Summary We studied 228 consecutive stem cell transplant recipients, screened for reactivation of human herpesvirus‐6 (HHV‐6) in peripheral blood and other specimens as clinically indicated by means of qualitative polymerase chain reaction. Among them, 197 received an allograft and 31 autograft. Ninety‐six of 228 patients (42·1%) showed HHV‐6 reactivation in peripheral blood and 129 of 228 (56·6%) demonstrated HHV‐6 in at least one of the specimens tested. 41·9% of patients were asymptomatic when HHV‐6 was identified. Clinical features, noted when HHV‐6 was detected, included interstitial or alveolar pneumonia, gastroduodenal and colorectal disease, bone marrow suppression and liver disease. However, based on clinical and histopathological criteria, HHV‐6 was considered a causal agent in only a minority of patients, in particular, those suffering from bone marrow suppression (n = 11), gastroduodenitis (five), colitis (three), interstitial/alveolar pneumonia (five), skin rash (one), pericarditis (two) and encephalitis (one). HHV‐6 reactivation was significantly associated with the occurrence of graft‐versus‐host disease [odds ratio (OR) 5·31], Epstein–Barr virus coinfection (OR 8·89) and unrelated donor transplantation (OR 5·67) indicating an increased stage of immunosuppression.

Morbidity and mortality in patients with malignancies are increased by viral infections. These mostly are reactivations of asymptomatic latent infections. They primarily concern clinical entities associated with the reactivation of herpes viruses, such as varicella zoster virus (VZV) and cytomegalovirus (CMV). Respiratory tract infections caused by influenza, parainfluenza or respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) are less common. Since reactivation of latent infections has major clinical impact, antiviral prophylaxis is an attractive approach for patients expecting immunosuppression. The main risk factor for clinically relevant reactivation is profound disruption of cellular immune response. Duration and severity of chemotherapy induced neutropenia are of lesser importance. The risk of viral complications rises significantly in the presence of sustained suppression of T-cell function, e.g. in recipients of allogeneic stem cell transplants or of alemtuzumab (Campath-1H) antibody therapy. The objective of this guideline is to review the basis of prophylactic strategies and to provide recommendations for clinicians treating patients with haematological malignancies and solid tumors.

Intravenous ivIGMA had no beneficial effects in neutropenic patients with hematologic malignancies and sepsis syndrome and septic shock.

Cytostatic chemotherapy of hematological malignancies is often complicated by neutropenia, which increases the risk of infections, especially if the neutrophil count is below 500/microl. Frequently, fever is the first, and in most patients the only, sign of an infection. Unexplained fever is defined as follows: temperature of >/=38.3 degrees C or >/=38.0 degrees C for at least 1 h, or measured twice within 12 h, if the neutrophil count is <500/microl or <1000/microl with predicted decline to 500/microl. Different risk categories can be identified according to the duration of neutropenia: low risk /=10 days. An empirical mono- or duotherapy with antipseudomonal and antistreptococcal agents should be initiated immediately. In the low risk patient group, oral therapy with cipro-, levo-, or ofloxacin combined with amoxicillin/clavulanic acid is permissible. For standard and high risk patients, monotherapy can be carried out with either ceftazidime, cefepime, piperacillin with tazobactam or a carbapenem. In duotherapy, a single dose of an aminoglycoside is combined with acylaminopenicillin or a cephalosporin of the third or fourth generation. The addition of glycopeptides in empirical therapy should only be considered in the presence of severe mucositis, or if a catheter-associated infection is suspected. If fever persists after 72-96 h of first-line therapy with antibiotics, the regimen should be modified (with the exception of e.g. coagulase-negative staphylococci infections, because these infections take longer to respond). Intermediate risk patients should additionally receive an aminoglycoside after monotherapy (penicillin or a cephalosporin). If a carbapenem was administered for monotherapy, this can be followed by a quinolone and/or a glycopeptide. In the high risk group, the same modifications should be made as in the intermediate risk group but with additional systemic antifungal treatment. In the presence of unexplained fever, fluconazole can be administered at first, but if this fails, amphotericin B (conventional or liposomal), itraconazole, voriconazole or caspofungin should be started. After defervescence to <38 degrees C, treatment should be continued for 7 days if the neutrophil count is <1000/microl, and for 2 days if the neutrophil count is >1000/microl.

Bacterial infections are the most common cause for treatment-related mortality in patients with neutropenia after chemotherapy. Here, we discuss the use of antibacterial prophylaxis against bacteria and Pneumocystis pneumonia (PCP) in neutropenic cancer patients and offer guidance towards the choice of drug. A literature search was performed to screen all articles published between September 2000 and January 2012 on antibiotic prophylaxis in neutropenic cancer patients. The authors assembled original reports and meta-analysis from the literature and drew conclusions, which were discussed and approved in a consensus conference of the Infectious Disease Working Party of the German Society of Hematology and Oncology (AGIHO). Antibacterial prophylaxis has led to a reduction of febrile events and infections. A significant reduction of overall mortality could only be shown in a meta-analysis. Fluoroquinolones are preferred for antibacterial and trimethoprim–sulfamethoxazole for PCP prophylaxis. Due to serious concerns about an increase of resistant pathogens, only patients at high risk of severe infections should be considered for antibiotic prophylaxis. Risk factors of individual patients and local resistance patterns must be taken into account. Risk factors, choice of drug for antibacterial and PCP prophylaxis and concerns regarding the use of prophylactic antibiotics are discussed in the review.

We demonstrate for the first time the MRI findings of adults with acute spinal cord involvement during bacterial meningitis. Magnetic resonance imaging showed central intramedullary hyperintensities on T2-weighted images that extended from the cervical to the lumbar cord, indicating myelitis. Clinical follow-up examinations suggest that myelitis during bacterial meningitis has an unfavorable prognosis.

Affinity cross-linking of '251-labeled recombinant human interleukin-6 (IL-6) to human hepatoma cells (HepG2) allowed the detection of three IL-6-containing complexes with molecular masses of 100 kDa, 120 kDa and 200 kDa.Treatment of HepG2 cells with dexamethasone led to a time-and dose-dependent up-regulation of IL-6-receptor mRNA levels. By the use of cross-linking this effect was also seen at the protein level, where all three 1L-6-binding complexes increased upon incubation of HepG2 cells with dexamethasone. Under conditions of IL-6-receptor up-regulation by dexamethasone, y-fibrinogen mRNA induction by IL-6 is stronger and occurs earlier than without dexamethasone. We propose therefore that the expression of the IL-6 receptor might be a ratelimiting step in acute-phase-protein induction.