Subscribe

Subscribe Today!

To sign up for our newsletter or print publications, please enter your contact information below.

I'd like to receive:

Completed Research: CLINICAL/TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCH
Abstract #CR02

Evaluation of Empiric Double Coverage with Tobramycin for Adult Patients with Febrile Neutropenia

JHOP - March 2022 Vol 12 Special Feature - HOPA Abstracts

Presenter: Amber B. Clemmons, BCOP, PharmD, Clinical Professor, University of Georgia College of Pharmacy, Augusta, GA

Co-Authors: Rachel Shelley, PharmD Candidate, University of Georgia College of Pharmacy; Vayou Chittavong, PharmD Candidate, University of Georgia College of Pharmacy; Huimin Hu, PhD Candidate, Department of Statistics, University of Georgia; Xianyan Chen, PhD, Statistician, Department of Statistics, University of Georgia; Andrew Chao, MD, Physician, Infectious Disease, Augusta University Medical Center; Daniel Anderson, PharmD, BCIDP, Infectious Disease Pharmacist, Pharmacy, Augusta University Medical Center; Joshua Eudy, PharmD, BCIDP, Infectious Disease Pharmacist, Pharmacy, Augusta University Medical Center

BACKGROUND: Appropriate empiric antibiotic use for patients with febrile neutropenia (FN) must balance adequate coverage per local antibiogram and patient factors (eg, history of resistance, clinical presentation), as well as principles of antimicrobial stewardship.1,2 Based on antibiogram reports showing poor susceptibility of Pseudomonas to cefepime, our institution requires the addition of empiric tobramycin therapy for 48 hours (or longer if there is growth of gram-negative organism) for initial management of FN. There is a paucity of data regarding dual antipseudomonal strategy in this setting.3-6

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the benefit of tobramycin therapy added to cefepime for empiric treatment of adult patients with FN.

METHOD: This retrospective review included adult patients with FN between January 2019 and July 2020. Patients were divided into 3 treatment cohorts: cefepime monotherapy; early dual therapy plus tobramycin therapy added within 48 hours of cefepime initiation, per protocol; and delayed dual therapy plus tobramycin therapy added after 48 hours of cefepime. The primary outcome was adherence to institutional protocol requiring empiric dual treatment with cefepime plus tobramycin. The secondary end points were a comparison of the 3 cohorts regarding hospital length of stay (LOS) and intensive care unit (ICU) LOS; incidence of gram-negative and cefepime-resistant bacteremia, and any gram-negative infection; acute kidney injury; and in-hospital mortality. Statistical analysis included logistic regression, chi-square test, or nonparametric test.

RESULTS: Of the 350 patients who received cefepime for FN, 146 (42%) received dual therapy with tobramycin, per protocol. Of those, approximately 80% of the patients discontinued tobramycin therapy by 48 hours. The patient demographics were similar among the 3 groups, except for fewer cases of hematology or transplant, and fewer cases of concomitant vancomycin and hypotension in the cefepime monotherapy group. Overall, the incidence of gram-negative bacteremia was 10%, with resistance to cefepime in 13% of available susceptibility reports. No difference was found among the groups regarding the incidence of gram-negative bacteremia, other gram-negative infections, cefepime resistance, acute kidney injury, ICU admission, or ICU LOS (all P >.05). Patients in the cefepime monotherapy group had shorter hospital LOS (6 days + 9.6 days) compared with the early dual-therapy (15 days ± 12.1 days) and delayed dual-therapy (22 days + 14.1 days) groups. Mortality was lower in the cefepime monotherapy cohort compared with the delayed dual-therapy (P = .04) but not compared with the early dual-therapy (P >.05) groups.

CONCLUSION: Overall, no benefits were seen with dual therapy compared with monotherapy groups. Patients who received dual therapy were more likely to have had a transplant or a hematological diagnosis, which might have confounded the LOS and mortality results. In addition, the incidence of gram-negative bacteremia and cefepime resistance was low. Optimal antimicrobial(s) therapy should be dictated by antibiogram, the patient history, and by any risk factors for treatment resistance.

  1. Freifeld AG, Bow EJ, Sepkowitz KA, et al. Clinical Practice Guideline for the Use of Antimicrobial Agents in Neutropenic Patients with Cancer: 2010 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2011;52:e56-e93.
  2. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines): Prevention and Treatment of Cancer-Related Infections. Version 1.2021. July 2, 2021. www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/infections.pdf. Accessed October 7, 2021.
  3. Lee NH, Kang JM, Lee JW, et al. Cefepime versus cefepime plus amikacin as an initial antibiotic choice for pediatric cancer patients with febrile neutropenia in an era of increasing cefepime resistance. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2020;39:931-936.
  4. Zengin E, Sarper N, Çakı Kılıç S. Piperacillin/tazobactam monotherapy versus piperacillin/tazobactam plus amikacin as initial empirical therapy for febrile neutropenia in children with acute leukemia. Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2011;28:311-320.
  5. Ponraj M, Dubashi B, Harish BH, et al. Cefepime vs. cefoperazone/sulbactam in combination with amikacin as empirical antibiotic therapy in febrile neutropenia. Support Care Cancer. 2018;26:3899-3908.
  6. Legrand M, Max A, Peigne V, et al. Survival in neutropenic patients with severe sepsis or septic shock. Crit Care Med. 2012;40:43-49.
Related Items
HOP(A) Springs Eternal
Bryna Delman Ewachiw, PharmD, BCOP, Mark L. Zangardi, PharmD, BCOP
JHOP - March 2022 Vol 12 Special Feature published on March 22, 2022 in Editorial, HOPA Abstracts
A Pooled Safety Analysis of Loncastuximab Tesirine in Relapsed or Refractory DLBCL in the LOTIS Clinical Trial Program: Incidence, Onset, and Management of Myelosuppression
JHOP - March 2022 Vol 12 Special Feature published on March 22, 2022 in HOPA Abstracts, Lymphoma
Treatment Patterns, Real-World Outcomes, and Resource Use in Patients with Non–MSI-High or Mismatch Repair Proficient Advanced Endometrial Cancer
JHOP - March 2022 Vol 12 Special Feature published on March 22, 2022 in HOPA Abstracts, Gynecologic Cancers
Development and Implementation of a Pharmacist-Led Virtual Clinic Improve the Management of Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer Receiving CDK4/6 Inhibitors
JHOP - March 2022 Vol 12 Special Feature published on March 22, 2022 in HOPA Abstracts, Breast Cancer
Impact of a Remote Oncology Clinical Pharmacist Program in 4 Community Oncology Practices
JHOP - March 2022 Vol 12 Special Feature published on March 22, 2022 in HOPA Abstracts
Impact of PGY2 Oncology Pharmacy Residents’ Learning Experiences During the COVID-19 Pandemic
JHOP - March 2022 Vol 12 Special Feature published on March 22, 2022 in HOPA Abstracts
Integrated Health-System Specialty Pharmacy Support in Reducing Financial Toxicity of Oral Oncolytic Therapy
JHOP - March 2022 Vol 12 Special Feature published on March 22, 2022 in HOPA Abstracts
Perceptions of PGY2 Oncology Programs on Financial Toxicity Education and Preparedness
JHOP - March 2022 Vol 12 Special Feature published on March 22, 2022 in HOPA Abstracts
Pharmacist-Led Oral Chemotherapy Monitoring Pilot Study and Assessment of Patient-Reported Outcomes and Adherence
JHOP - March 2022 Vol 12 Special Feature published on March 22, 2022 in HOPA Abstracts, Chemotherapy
The Impact of a Comprehensive Immunotherapy Continuing Education Curriculum on Pharmacists’ Knowledge, Competence, and Confidence
JHOP - March 2022 Vol 12 Special Feature published on March 22, 2022 in HOPA Abstracts, Immunotherapy
Copyright © Green Hill Healthcare Communications, LLC. All rights reserved.