[Current clinical practice in the treatment of febrile neutropenia (FN)].

ABSTRACT

Because of the refractory and recurrent nature of febrile neutropenia (FN), definite diagnosis and early empiric treatment with antibiotics are important for FN patients. With this background, guidelines for FN treatment have been published in Japan and overseas, although a treatment method appropriate for clinical practice in Japan has not yet been established. Therefore, we conducted a survey of actual practice, including trends in prescription of antibiotics for FN, in the hope that it would help establish a definitive treatment for FN in Japan. The survey results confirmed that FN patients under care of hematology departments accounted for the largest proportion, followed by pediatrics (hematology), pulmonary medicine, medical oncology, and respiratory surgery, and the proportions of patients diagnosed with FN and those receiving antibiotics in hematology departments are larger than in other departments. Across all departments, cefepime (CFPM) is most frequently used as the initial treatment of choice, accounting for 35.9% of prescriptions, followed by meropenem (MEPM) (24.3%). These drugs are selected because they exhibit high potency and wide coverage against organisms that are presumed to cause FN, and their costs are covered by insurance, while the existence of insurance coverage is the major determining factor for treatment in Japan. Among second-line drugs, MEPM is most frequently used, accounting for 46.3% of prescriptions. The guidelines are commonly used as the basis for treatment, accounting for 52.0% of all departments, especially the guidelines established by the Japan Febrile Neutropenia Study Group. On the other hand, the percentage of departments that have introduced a hospital protocol and clinical path is only 13.0% in total. To provide appropriate treatment for FN patients, insurance coverage and introduction of a hospital protocol and clinical path based on guidelines and evidence are essential. The current situation, in which these are not implemented, is not desirable. The survey results show that the guidelines need to be revised to more closely reflect the actual situation in Japan and hospital protocols and clinical paths need to be introduced.