Benefits and Safety of Empiric Antibiotic Treatment Active Against KPC-K. pneumoniae in Febrile Neutropenic Patients with Acute Leukemia Who are Colonized with KPC-K. pneumoniae. A 7-Years Retrospective Observational Cohort Study

Micozzi, Alessandra; Minotti, Clara; Capria, Saveria; Cartoni, Claudio; Trisolini, Silvia Maria; Assanto, Giovanni Manfredi; Barberi, Walter; Moleti, Maria Luisa; Santilli, Stefania; Martelli, Maurizio; Gentile, Giuseppe

doi:10.2147/idr.s393802

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The second is a single-center study that evaluated ceftazidime–avibactam-based therapy vs. colistin-based therapy for the empirical treatment of febrile neutropenia in patients colonized by KPC-producing K . pneumoniae [ 21 ]. This study included 94 episodes of febrile neutropenia in 55 leukemic patients.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many included patients with hematological malignancies, hematopoietic stem cell transplants, and neutropenia, but they failed to analyze them separately from the total cohort [ 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 ]. Few retrospective studies have been published on patients with cancer, hematological malignancies, and hematopoietic stem cell transplants, and have shown the superiority of ceftazidime–avibactam over other antibiotics [ 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 ]. To our knowledge, however, no prospective multicenter studies have evaluated the clinical impact of ceftazidime–avibactam vs. other antibiotics on these infections exclusively in high-risk neutropenic patients.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Ceftazidime–Avibactam Improves Outcomes in High-Risk Neutropenic Patients with Klebsiella pneumoniae Carbapenemase-Producing Enterobacterales Bacteremia

Herrera,

Torres,

Laborde

et al. 2024

Microorganisms

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Few studies have evaluated the efficacy of ceftazidime–avibactam (CA) for Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales bacteremia (KPC-PEB) in high-risk neutropenic patients. This is a prospective multicenter observational study in high-risk neutropenic patients with multi-drug resistant Enterobacterales bacteremia. They were compared according to the resistance mechanism and definitive treatment provided: KPC-CPE treated with CA (G1), KPC-CPE treated with other antibiotics (G2), and patients with ESBL-producing Enterobacterales bacteremia who received appropriate definitive therapy (G3). Thirty-day mortality was evaluated using a logistic regression model, and survival was analyzed with Kaplan–Meier curves. A total of 238 patients were included: 18 (G1), 52 (G2), and 168 (G3). Klebsiella spp. (60.9%) and Escherichia coli (26.4%) were the Enterobacterales most frequently isolated, and 71% of the bacteremias had a clinical source. The resistance profile between G1 and G2 was colistin 35.3% vs. 36.5%, amikacin 16.7% vs. 40.4%, and tigeclycline 11.1% vs. 19.2%. The antibiotics prescribed in combination with G2 were carbapenems, colistin, amikacin, fosfomycin, tigecycline, and fluoroquinolones. Seven-day clinical response in G1 vs. G2 vs. G3 was 94.4% vs. 42.3% vs. 82.7%, respectively (p < 0.001). Thirty-day overall mortality in G1 vs. G2 vs. G3 was 22.2% vs. 53.8% vs. 11.9%, respectively (p < 0.001), and infection-related mortality was 5.5% vs. 51.9% vs. 7.7% (p < 0.001). The independent risk factors for mortality were Pitt score > 4: OR 3.63, 95% CI, 1.18–11.14 (p = 0.025) and KPC-PEB treated with other antibiotics: OR 8.85, 95% CI, 2.58–30.33 (p = 0.001), while 7-day clinical response was a protective factor for survival: OR 0.02, 95% CI, 0.01–0.08 (p < 0.001). High-risk neutropenic patients with KPC-CPE treated with CA had an outcome similar to those treated for ESBL-producing Enterobacterales, with higher 7-day clinical response and lower overall and infection-related mortality than those treated with other antibiotics. In view of these data, CA may be considered the preferred therapeutic option for KPC-PEB in high-risk neutropenic patients.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ceftazidime–Avibactam Improves Outcomes in High-Risk Neutropenic Patients with Klebsiella pneumoniae Carbapenemase-Producing Enterobacterales Bacteremia

Herrera,

Torres,

Laborde

et al. 2024

Microorganisms

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Antibiotic practice and stewardship in the management of neutropenic fever: a survey of US institutions

Wang,

Arya,

Patel

et al. 2024

Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To describe neutropenic fever management practices among healthcare institutions. Design: Survey. Participants: Members of the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America Research Network (SRN) representing healthcare institutions within the United States. Methods: An electronic survey was distributed to SRN representatives, with questions pertaining to demographics, antimicrobial prophylaxis, supportive care, and neutropenic fever management. The survey was distributed from fall 2022 through spring 2023. Results: 40 complete responses were recorded (54.8% response rate), with respondent institutions accounting for approximately 15.7% of 2021 US hematologic malignancy hospitalizations and 14.9% of 2020 US bone marrow transplantations. Most entities have institutional guidelines for neutropenic fever management (35, 87.5%) and prophylaxis (31, 77.5%), and first-line treatment included IV antipseudomonal antibiotics (35, 87.5% cephalosporin; 5, 12.5% penicillin; 0, 0% carbapenem). We observed significant heterogeneity in treatment course decisions, with roughly half (18, 45.0%) of respondents continuing antibiotics until neutrophil recovery, while the remainder having criteria for de-escalation prior to neutrophil recovery. Respondents were more willing to de-escalate prior to neutrophil recovery in patients with identified clinical (27, 67.5% with pneumonia) or microbiological (30, 75.0% with bacteremia) sources after dedicated treatment courses. Conclusions: We found substantial variation in the practice of de-escalation of empiric antibiotics relative to neutrophil recovery, highlighting a need for more robust evidence for and adoption of this practice. No respondents use carbapenems as first-line therapy, comparing favorably to prior survey studies conducted in other countries.

show abstract

Benefits and Safety of Empiric Antibiotic Treatment Active Against KPC-K. pneumoniae in Febrile Neutropenic Patients with Acute Leukemia Who are Colonized with KPC-K. pneumoniae. A 7-Years Retrospective Observational Cohort Study

Cited by 2 publications

References 29 publications

Ceftazidime–Avibactam Improves Outcomes in High-Risk Neutropenic Patients with Klebsiella pneumoniae Carbapenemase-Producing Enterobacterales Bacteremia

Ceftazidime–Avibactam Improves Outcomes in High-Risk Neutropenic Patients with Klebsiella pneumoniae Carbapenemase-Producing Enterobacterales Bacteremia

Antibiotic practice and stewardship in the management of neutropenic fever: a survey of US institutions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About