Premium
Piperacillin/tazobactam versus cefepime for the empirical treatment of pediatric cancer patients with neutropenia and fever: A randomized and open‐label study
Author(s) -
Uygun Vedat,
Karasu Gulsun Tezcan,
Ogunc Dilara,
Yesilipek Akif,
Hazar Volkan
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
pediatric blood and cancer
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.116
H-Index - 105
eISSN - 1545-5017
pISSN - 1545-5009
DOI - 10.1002/pbc.22100
Subject(s) - medicine , cefepime , piperacillin/tazobactam , neutropenia , febrile neutropenia , pediatric cancer , tazobactam , piperacillin , regimen , randomized controlled trial , blood cancer , cancer , surgery , antibiotics , chemotherapy , genetics , antibiotic resistance , imipenem , bacteria , microbiology and biotechnology , pseudomonas aeruginosa , biology
Abstract Objectives This is a prospective, randomized, and open‐label clinical trial that examines the efficiency and safety of PIP/TAZO monotherapy in comparison to cefepime (CEF), for the empirical treatment of pediatric cancer patients with neutropenia and fever. Methods One hundred thirty‐one consecutive febrile episodes in 70 neutropenic pediatric cancer patients received randomized treatment either with piperacillin/tazobactam (PIP/TAZO) 80 mg/kg piperacillin/10 mg/kg tazobactam every 6 hr or CEF 50 mg/kg every 8 hr. Clinical response was determined at completion of therapy. Duration of fever, neutropenia, hospitalization, the need for modification of the therapy, and mortality rates were compared between the two groups. Results One hundred twenty‐seven episodes in 69 patients (35 females, 34 males) with a median age of 4.2 years were assessed for efficiency (65 PIP/TAZO, 62 CEF). The frequency of success without modification of treatment was nearly identical for both PIP/TAZO (60.0%) and CEF (61.3%) ( P > 0.05). The overall response rate, with or without modification of assigned treatment, was 96.9% for PIP/TAZO and 98.4% for CEP ( P > 0.05). Infection‐related mortality at the end of the febrile episode was 2.4%. Duration of fever and hospitalization were not different between the treatment groups. No major side effects were observed in neither of the groups. Conclusions PIP/TAZO treatment was as effective and safe as CEF monotherapy as an initial empirical regimen in pediatric cancer patients with fever and neutropenia. Pediatr Blood Cancer 2009;53:610–614. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.