Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
The efficacy and safety of cefepime or meropenem in the treatment of febrile neutropenia in patients with lung cancer. A randomized phase II study.
Fujita, Masaki; Matsumoto, Takemasa; Inoue, Yuuichi; Wataya, Hiroshi; Takayama, Koichi; Ishida, Masayuki; Ebi, Noriyuki; Kishimoto, Junji; Ichinose, Yukito.
Afiliação
  • Fujita M; Department of Respiratory Medicine, Fukuoka University Hospital, Japan. Electronic address: mfujita@fukuoka-u.ac.jp.
  • Matsumoto T; Department of Respiratory Medicine, Fukuoka University Hospital, Japan.
  • Inoue Y; Department of Respiratory Medicine, Japan Community Health Care Organization Isahaya General Hospital, Japan.
  • Wataya H; Department of Internal Medicine, Saiseikai Fukuoka General Hospital, Japan.
  • Takayama K; Research Institute for Diseases of the Chest, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Japan.
  • Ishida M; Department of Infections Disease, Nagasaki University Hospital, Japan.
  • Ebi N; Department of Respiratory Oncology, Iizuka Hospital, Japan.
  • Kishimoto J; Department of Research and Development of Next Generation Medicine, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Japan.
  • Ichinose Y; Clinical Research Institute, National Kyushu Cancer Center, Japan.
J Infect Chemother ; 22(4): 235-9, 2016 Apr.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26867793
Febrile neutropenia frequently develops after chemotherapy. There is little evidence to indicate the type of antimicrobial agents that should be used in the treatment of febrile neutropenia in patients with solid tumors. The objective is to determine the efficacy and safety of cefepime (CFPM) and meropenem (MEPM) in the treatment of febrile neutropenia in lung cancer patients in a prospective randomized study. FN patients with lung cancer were randomly divided into CFPM or MEPM groups. The primary end-point was the response rate. The secondary end-points were the defervescence rates at 72 h, 7 days, 14 days and the incidence of adverse events. Twenty-one patients were treated with CFPM and 24 patients were treated with MEPM. One patient died of FN. The CFPM treatment completion rate was 17.65% (95% CI; 0.00-35.77%), while the MEPM treatment completion rate was 38.10% (95% CI; 17.33-58.87%). The defervescence rates at 72 h, 7 days, and 14 days were 70.59%, 86.67%, and 100.00%, respectively in the CFPM group; and 65.00%, 84.21%, and 92.31% in the MEPM group. Adverse events were observed in 33.33% of the CFPM group and 45.83% of the MEPM group. The response rate of the CFPM group was 94.12% (95% CI; 73.02-98.95%), while that of the MEPM group was 85.71% (95% CI; 65.36-95.02%). No differences were found in the efficacy or safety of CFPM and MEPM in the treatment of febrile neutropenia in patients with lung cancer.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Bases de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Cefalosporinas / Tienamicinas / Neutropenia Febril / Neoplasias Pulmonares / Antibacterianos Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Etiology_studies / Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Aged / Aged80 / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: J Infect Chemother Assunto da revista: MICROBIOLOGIA / TERAPIA POR MEDICAMENTOS Ano de publicação: 2016 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Bases de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Cefalosporinas / Tienamicinas / Neutropenia Febril / Neoplasias Pulmonares / Antibacterianos Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Etiology_studies / Observational_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limite: Aged / Aged80 / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: J Infect Chemother Assunto da revista: MICROBIOLOGIA / TERAPIA POR MEDICAMENTOS Ano de publicação: 2016 Tipo de documento: Article