Fluconazole versus amphotericin B as empirical antifungal therapy of unexplained fever in granulocytopenic cancer patients: a pragmatic, multicentre, prospective and randomised clinical trial. Prophylactic intravenous amphotericin B in neutropenic autologous bone marrow transplant recipients. A randomized comparison of fluconazole with amphotericin B as empiric anti-fungal agents in cancer patients with prolonged fever and neutropenia. Empiric antifungal therapy in febrile granulocytopenic patients. EORTC International Antimicrobial Therapy Cooperative Group. Low-dose amphotericin B lipid complex vs. conventional amphotericin B for empirical antifungal therapy of neutropenic fever in patients with hematologic malignancies--a randomized, controlled trial. Antifungal prophylaxis during remission induction therapy for acute leukemia fluconazole versus intravenous amphotericin B. Randomized trial of fluconazole versus low-dose amphotericin B in prophylaxis against fungal infections in patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Preventing fungal infection in neutropenic patients with acute leukemia: fluconazole compared with oral amphotericin B. Effect of prophylactic fluconazole on the frequency of fungal infections, amphotericin B use, and health care costs in patients undergoing intensive chemotherapy for hematologic neoplasias.
Amphotericin B, despite its intrinsic servere toxicity, is the most commonly used empirical antifungal therapy in cancer patients with unexplained fever not responding to empirical antibacterial therapy. The aim of this study was to show whether fluconazole was as effective as, and less toxic than, amphotericin, with no effort made to compare the antifungal activity of the two drugs. A group of 112 persistently febrile (> 38 degrees C) and granulocytopenic (< 1000 cells/mm3) cancer patients, not receiving any absorbable antifungal antibiotic for prophylaxis, with a mean age of 27 years (range 1-73 years), undergoing chemotherapy for a variety of malignancies and with a diagnosis of unexplained fever after at least 96 h of empirical antibacterial therapy, were randomised to receive either fluconazole (6 mg/kg/day up to 400 mg/day) or amphotericin B (0.8 mg/kg/day) as empirical antifungal treatment. Patients were required to have normal chest X-rays at randomisation, no previous history of aspergillosis and negative surveillance cultures for Aspergillus. The intention-to-treat analysis showed defervescence and survival without treatment modification in 42 of 56 patients (75%) in the fluconazole group and in 37 of 56 (66%) in the amphotericin B group (P = 0.4). Duration of therapy was 6 days (95% CI = 4-8 days) in both groups. Death occurred in 3 patients (5%) in the fluconazole and in 2 (4%) in the amphotericin B group. No fungal death was documented in either group. Adverse events developed in 18 of 56 patients (32%) in the fluconazole group and in 46 of 56 (82%) in the amphotericin B group (P < 0.001). In the amphotericin B group, 5 patients had treatment discontinued because of toxicity, versus none in the fluconazole group, a difference which approached statistical significance (P = 0.06). This study shows that fluconazole is by far less toxic than amphotericin B and suggests that it might be as effective as amphotericin B, in pragmatical terms and for this specific indication. However, numbers are too small to allow definitive conclusions about efficacy, and the use of fluconazole for this indication remains experimental. Future studies should try to identify patients more at risk of fungal infections, with the aim of individualising antifungal approaches. This study assessed the efficacy, toxicity, and pharmacology of low-dose amphotericin B given prophylactically to patients (serum concentrations of 0.2-0.4 microgram/ml) undergoing bone marrow transplantation. Yeast isolates from patients' oropharyngeal areas had MICs of 0.1-0.2 microgram/ml, and none were amphotericin B resistant. The effect of low-dose amphotericin B on reducing the numbers of yeast colonizing the oropharyngeal area was significant (P less than .01). The average delay in switching to high-dose prophylactic amphotericin B was only 1 day; the decision to do so because of a perceived fungal infection occurred more frequently for the placebo group (P = .06). Fewer patients from the low-dose amphotericin B group (8.8%) than from the placebo group (14.3%) had fungi isolated from normally sterile body sites (P = .35). Infusion-related side effects but not systemic toxicities were significantly greater (P less than .001) in the amphotericin B group. The 6-week survival was greater in those receiving amphotericin B (P less than .03), but the improved survival could not be attributed to the prevention of fungal infections. Several studies have documented the efficacy of amphotericin B as empiric antifungal therapy in cancer patients with prolonged fever and neutropenia. Amphotericin, however, is a toxic drug. Fluconazole has broad-spectrum antifungal activity with an excellent safety profile. Although prophylactic use of fluconazole is widespread, its efficacy as an empiric antifungal agent has not been extensively investigated.
                We randomly assigned 106 patients with absolute neutropenia (< or = 500 cells microL) and persistent fever of undetermined origin (> 38 degrees C) despite 1 week of broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy to receive either fluconazole 400 mg orally daily or amphotericin B 0.5 mg/kg/day. Patients with obvious invasive fungal infections were excluded, as were those with abnormal renal or hepatic function. Success was defined as defervescence with the initially assigned antifungal regimen without development of clinically evident invasive fungal infection.
                Six patients were excluded from the analysis, mostly because they did not have severe neutropenia. Forty-eight patients received amphotericin B, and 52 received fluconazole. Baseline clinical characteristics and laboratory parameters as well as duration of neutropenia (7.7 versus 6.9 days), duration of fever (7.8 versus 8.1 days), and duration of hospitalization (10.4 versus 8.3 days) were similar between those receiving amphotericin and fluconazole. Treatment success rates and mortality rates were similar in the two groups: 22 (46%) patients in the amphotericin group and 29 (56%) patients in the fluconazole group responded successfully to therapy (P = 0.3), whereas 16 (33%) patients in the amphotericin group and 14 (27%) patients in the fluconazole group died during hospitalization (P = 0.5). Adverse events such as chills and fever (4 versus 1), bronchospasm (2 versus none), severe hypokalemia (25 versus 12) and nephrotoxicity (9 versus 3) were more frequently observed in patients receiving amphotericin. Adverse prognostic factors included prolonged duration of neutropenia and pneumonia.
                These results suggest that fluconazole is an equally effective but less toxic alternative to amphotericin B as empiric antifungal therapy in cancer patients with prolonged fever and neutropenia. The optimal management of fever in granulocytopenic patients remains controversial. Invasive fungal infections are common and life-threatening but are difficult to diagnose early. In this randomized study, we investigated the potential value of empiric administration of amphotericin B (versus no empiric antifungal therapy) in 132 patients remaining febrile and granulocytopenic despite broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy for four days.
                The patients were divided into two groups: 68 who were randomly assigned to receive empiric amphotericin B, and 64 who were randomly assigned to continue only the protocol antibiotics that they were already receiving. Amphotericin B was administered intravenously as follows: every other day at a dose of 1.2 mg/kg body weight or daily at a dose of 0.6 mg/kg body weight. Clinical response was evaluated as success or failure, depending upon the febrile course after randomization.
                Based on the evolution of fever, the response rate was 69% in the group of patients receiving empiric amphotericin B and 53% for the other group (p = 0.09). There were six documented (four severe) fungal infections in 64 patients randomized not to receive the antifungal therapy as compared to only one fungemia among 68 patients treated empirically with amphotericin B (p = 0.1). No deaths due to fungal infection occurred among the patients receiving empiric amphotericin B compared to four in the other group (p = 0.05). However, this study did not demonstrate a difference in survival between the two groups of patients (with or without empiric amphotericin B). The benefit of empiric administration of amphotericin B was primarily observed in specific subgroups of patients, such as those who did not receive any antifungal prophylaxis (78% versus 45%, p = 0.04), those who were severely granulocytopenic (69% versus 46%, p = 0.06), febrile patients with a clinically documented infection (75% versus 41%, p = 0.03), and patients older than 15 years of age (67% versus 47%, p = 0.06).
                These data suggest a benefit for early amphotericin B treatment in granulocytopenic patients with continued fever despite antibiotic therapy. Conventional amphotericin B (c-AmB) remains the empirical antifungal treatment of choice for neutropenic patients with persistent fever of unknown origin (FUO). Unfortunately, empirical treatment with c-AmB is hampered by its safety profile, with frequent infusion-related adverse events (IRAEs) and renal toxicity. Amphotericin B lipid complex (ABLC) has been investigated for this indication due to its low toxicity profile. The recommended dose of ABLC is 5 mg/kg/d, which is five to seven times higher than the recommended dose of c-AmB.
                This randomized, controlled trial includes 105 adult patients with hematologic malignancies and with FUO after receiving chemotherapy or autologous stem cell transplantation. Patients were randomly allocated to receive ABLC at 1 mg/kg/d or c-AmB at 0.6 mg/kg/d for empirical antifungal therapy.
                The incidence of renal toxicity was significantly lower in the ABLC group, compared with c-AmB group: 8% vs. 32%, respectively (P = 0.003). The rates of IRAEs were similar in both groups (73% for ABLC vs. 77% for c-AmB). The overall response rate was 72% for ABLC compared with 48% for c-AmB (P = 0.018). This difference was mainly due to the significantly higher renal toxicity in the c-AmB group. The number of emergent fungal infections and overall mortality were similar in both groups.
                This randomized trial suggests that ABLC at 1 mg/kg/d produces less nephrotoxicity than c-AmB, without differences in the incidence of IRAEs and with similar efficacy.
                Copyright Blackwell Munksgaard 2004. Fungal infection is a frequent and often fatal complication in patients undergoing remission induction therapy for acute leukemia. Although candidiasis is the most common infection, mold infections are increasing in frequency. Fluconazole (FLU) is a new antifungal agent that has been used successfully to treat Candida infections and has modest activity against aspergillosis in animal models. Subtherapeutic doses of amphotericin B (AMB) have been considered effective as prophylaxis in these patients. This study was designed to compare the efficacy and toxicity of these agents as antifungal prophylaxis.
                Adults with acute leukemia undergoing remission induction chemotherapy randomly were assigned to receive antifungal prophylaxis with AMB (0.5 mg/kg three times weekly) or FLU (400 mg daily). Trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole was administered as an antibacterial prophylaxis. Prophylaxis was continued until the patient achieved complete remission or was treated for 8 weeks without antileukemic response. Prophylaxis was discontinued if the patient experienced a possible or proven fungal infection or a serious toxicity.
                Overall, 58% of the 36 patients assigned to AMB successfully completed prophylaxis compared with 80% of the 41 patients assigned to FLU (< 0.05). Proven, probable, or possible fungal infections occurred in 31% and 17% of the patients, respectively. The risk of discontinuing prophylaxis due to fungal infection or toxicity increased with time in the study and was significantly greater for AMB (P = 0.02).
                At the dose used in this study, AMB was no more effective and was more toxic than FLU for prophylaxis of fungal infections in patients undergoing remission induction chemotherapy for acute leukemia. Over the past decade, invasive fungal infections have become an increasingly important problem in patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). The optimal approach for prophylactic antifungal therapy has yet to be determined. To resolve this issue, we performed a prospective randomized study to compare the efficacy of fluconazole (FL) versus low-dose amphotericin B (AmB) in preventing fungal infections during the first 100 days after HSCT. Patients undergoing allogenic or autologous HSCT were randomized to receive fluconazole 200 mg/day PO or amphotericin B 0.2 mg/kg/day IV beginning 1 day prior to commencement of conditioning regimen and continuing until engraftment, drug-associated toxicity was suspected, or systemic fungal infection was suspected or proven. High-dose amphotericin B (0.5-1.0 mg/kg/day) was started for patients with suspected or proven fungal infections. From January 1993 to December 1998, a total of 186 patients were enrolled into the trial, with 100 receiving FL and 86 receiving AmB. Eighty (43%) patients were removed from prophylaxis for persistent fever despite broad-spectrum antibacterial therapy or suspected fungal infections (FL 46 vs. AmB 34, P > 0.05). The incidence of proven fungal infections (FL 12% vs. AmB 12.8%), suspected fungal infections (FL 4% vs. AmB 2.3%), superficial fungal infections (FL 1% vs. AmB 4.6%) did not show any significant difference. The survival at 100 days post transplant was similar between the 2 groups (FL 78% vs. AmB 70%, P = 0.254). Death attributable to fungal infections was similar in both groups (6% vs. 7%, P > 0.05). We conclude that fluconazole is as effective as low-dose amphotericin B in prophylaxis against fungal infections in patients undergoing hematopoietic cell transplantation.
                Copyright 2002 Wiley-Liss, Inc. To compare the efficacy and tolerability of fluconazole and oral amphotericin B in preventing fungal infection in neutropenic patients with acute leukemia.
                A randomized, controlled, multicenter trial.
                30 hematologic units in tertiary care or university hospitals.
                820 consecutive, afebrile, adult patients with acute leukemia and chemotherapy-induced neutropenia.
                Patients were randomly assigned to receive fluconazole, 150 mg, as a once-daily capsule, or amphotericin B suspension, 500 mg every 6 hours.
                An intention-to-treat analysis was done for 820 patients: 420 treated with fluconazole and 400 treated with oral amphotericin B.
                Definite systemic fungal infection occurred in 2.6% of fluconazole recipients and 2.5% of amphotericin B recipients; suspected systemic fungal infection requiring the empiric use of intravenous amphotericin B occurred in 16% of fluconazole recipients and 21% of oral amphotericin B recipients, a difference of 5 percentage points (95% CI for difference, -0.02% to 10%; P = 0.07). Superficial fungal infection was documented in 1.7% of fluconazole recipients compared with 2.7% of amphotericin B recipients, a difference of one percentage point (CI of difference, -0.9% to 3%; P > 0.2). The distribution of fungal isolates in systemic and superficial fungal infection was similar in both groups. The overall mortality rate accounted for 10% in both groups. An excellent compliance was documented for 90% of patients treated with fluconazole compared with 72% of those treated with amphotericin B suspension, a difference of 18 percentage points (CI for difference, 13% to 23%). Side effects were documented less frequently in fluconazole than in amphotericin B recipients (1.4% compared with 7%, a difference of 5.6 percentage points; CI for difference, 2% to 8%; P < 0.01).
                Fluconazole was at least as effective as oral amphotericin B in preventing systemic and superficial fungal infection and the empiric use of amphotericin B in neutropenic patients with acute leukemia but was better tolerated. Fungal infections are a major problem in patients with hematologic malignancy. Attempts to reduce their frequency with antifungal agents have not been successful. A double-blind, controlled, single-center trial was conducted with 96 consecutive patients undergoing 154 episodes of chemotherapy. Patients received 400 mg of fluconazole or placebo until bone marrow recovery or initiation of intravenous amphotericin B infusions. End points were amphotericin B use, fungal infection, stable neutrophil count > 0.5 x 10(9)/L, toxicity precluding further fluconazole use, and death. By Kaplan-Meier estimation, the time to initiation of amphotericin B therapy was shorter in 76 patients treated with placebo than in 75 treated with fluconazole (P = .003). Also, fluconazole reduced the number of febrile days by 20% (P = .002) and prevented oropharyngeal candidiasis (1/75 vs. 9/76, P = .018). The frequency of deep mycoses (8/76 vs. 8/75) and outcome were unaffected. Fluconazole did not have a favorable effect on infection-related health care costs and was associated with prolonged severe neutropenia (P = .01).
Intravenous amphotericin B was the only antifungal agent that reduced total mortality. It should therefore be preferred when prophylactic or empirical antifungal therapy in cancer patients with neutropenia is instituted.