Antimicrobial use and appropriateness in neutropenic fever: a study of the Hospital National Antimicrobial Prescribing Survey data.

BACKGROUND: Neutropenic fever (NF) is a common complication in patients receiving chemotherapy. Judicious antimicrobial use is paramount to minimize morbidity and mortality and to avoid antimicrobial-related harms. OBJECTIVES: To use an Australian national dataset of antimicrobial prescriptions for the treatment of NF to describe antimicrobial use, prescription guideline compliance and appropriateness; and to compare these findings across different healthcare settings and patient demographics. We also aimed to identify trends and practice changes over time. METHODS: Data were extracted from the Hospital National Antimicrobial Prescribing Survey (Hospital NAPS) database from August 2013 to May 2022. Antimicrobial prescriptions with a NF indication were analysed for antimicrobial use, guideline compliance and appropriateness according to the Hospital NAPS methodology. Demographic factors, hospital classifications and disease characteristics were compared. RESULTS: A total of 2887 (n = 2441 adults, n = 441 paediatric) NF prescriptions from 254 health facilities were included. Piperacillin-tazobactam was the most prescribed antimicrobial. Overall, 87.4% of prescriptions were appropriate. Piperacillin-tazobactam and cefepime had the highest appropriateness though incorrect piperacillin-tazobactam dosing was observed. Lower appropriateness was identified for meropenem, vancomycin, and gentamicin prescribing particularly in the private hospital and paediatric cohorts. The most common reasons for inappropriate prescribing were spectrum too broad, incorrect dosing or frequency, and incorrect duration. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides insights into antimicrobial prescribing practices for NF in Australia. We have identified three key areas for improvement: piperacillin-tazobactam dosing, paediatric NF prescribing and private hospital NF prescribing. Findings from this study will inform the updated Australian and New Zealand consensus guidelines for the management of neutropenic fever in patients with cancer.

Evaluating the cost-effectiveness of [18F]FDG-PET/CT for investigation of persistent or recurrent neutropenic fever in high-risk haematology patients.

BACKGROUND: A recent randomised trial demonstrated [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography in combination with low-dose CT (FDG-PET/CT), compared to standard of care computed tomography (CT) imaging, positively impacted antimicrobial management and outcomes of acute leukaemia and haematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients with persistent and recurrent neutropenic fever. We conducted an economic evaluation from a healthcare perspective alongside the clinical trial. METHODS: Unit costs in Australian dollars were applied to all resources used (antimicrobials, diagnostic tests, ICU and hospital bed days). Effectiveness was measured as number of patients with antimicrobial rationalisation, 6-month mortality and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) derived from patient-reported trial-based health-related quality-of-life. Generalised linear models were used to analyse costs and outcomes. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for all outcomes and net monetary benefit (NMB) for QALYs were calculated. We performed bootstrapping with 1000 replications using the recycled predictions method. RESULTS: The adjusted healthcare costs were lower for FDG-PET/CT (mean $49,563; 95%CI 36,867, 65,133) compared to CT (mean $57,574; 95% CI 44,837, 73,347). The difference in QALYs between the two groups was small (0.001; 95% CI -0.001, 0.004). When simulated 1000 times, FDG-PET/CT was the dominant strategy as it was cheaper with better outcomes than the standard CT group in 74% of simulations. The estimated NMBs at willingness-to-pay thresholds of $50,000 and $100,000 per QALY were positive, thus FDG-PET/CT remained cost-effective at these thresholds. CONCLUSIONS: FDG-PET/CT is cost effective when compared to CT for investigation of persistent/recurrent neutropenic fever in high-risk patients, providing further support for incorporation of FDG-PET/CT into clinical guidelines and funding. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03429387.