We retrospectively evaluated the efficacy and safety of the combination drug piperacillin/tazobactam (PIPC/TAZ) in comparison with those of fourth-generation cephalosporins (4th Cephs) as initial empirical treatment i...We retrospectively evaluated the efficacy and safety of the combination drug piperacillin/tazobactam (PIPC/TAZ) in comparison with those of fourth-generation cephalosporins (4th Cephs) as initial empirical treatment in hematological malignancies patients with febrile neutropenia (FN). Among 200 patients assessed in this study, 49 had received PIPC/TAZ and 151 4th Cephs. Patient background characteristics were comparable between the two treatment groups. The overall efficacy rate in those receiving 4th Cephs and PIPC/TAZ was 57.0% (86/151 patients) and 59.2% (29/49 patients), respectively, with no significant difference detected between the two treatment regimens (P = 0.78). Treat-ment did not need to be discontinued or interrupted due to development of adverse drug reactions in any of the patients. Therefore in this study the efficacy and safety of PIPC/TAZ as initial antimicrobial treatment for FN in patients with hematological malignancies were not inferior to those of 4th Cephs. Based on the preliminary data obtained in this study, we propose to conduct a multicenter, prospective, controlled study to compare PIPC/TAZ versus CFPM given as empirical antimicrobial treatment against FN in patients with hematological malignancies.展开更多
文摘We retrospectively evaluated the efficacy and safety of the combination drug piperacillin/tazobactam (PIPC/TAZ) in comparison with those of fourth-generation cephalosporins (4th Cephs) as initial empirical treatment in hematological malignancies patients with febrile neutropenia (FN). Among 200 patients assessed in this study, 49 had received PIPC/TAZ and 151 4th Cephs. Patient background characteristics were comparable between the two treatment groups. The overall efficacy rate in those receiving 4th Cephs and PIPC/TAZ was 57.0% (86/151 patients) and 59.2% (29/49 patients), respectively, with no significant difference detected between the two treatment regimens (P = 0.78). Treat-ment did not need to be discontinued or interrupted due to development of adverse drug reactions in any of the patients. Therefore in this study the efficacy and safety of PIPC/TAZ as initial antimicrobial treatment for FN in patients with hematological malignancies were not inferior to those of 4th Cephs. Based on the preliminary data obtained in this study, we propose to conduct a multicenter, prospective, controlled study to compare PIPC/TAZ versus CFPM given as empirical antimicrobial treatment against FN in patients with hematological malignancies.
