Antimicrobial Prophylaxis for Adult Patients With Cancer-Related Immunosuppression: ASCO and IDSA Clinical Practice Guideline Update

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (30) ◽  
pp. 3043-3054 ◽  
Author(s):  
Randy A. Taplitz ◽  
Erin B. Kennedy ◽  
Eric J. Bow ◽  
Jennie Crews ◽  
Charise Gleason ◽  
...  

Purpose To provide an updated joint ASCO/Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) guideline on antimicrobial prophylaxis for adult patients with immunosuppression associated with cancer and its treatment. Methods ASCO and IDSA convened an update Expert Panel and conducted a systematic review of relevant studies from May 2011 to November 2016. The guideline recommendations were based on the review of evidence by the Expert Panel. Results Six new or updated meta-analyses and six new primary studies were added to the updated systematic review. Recommendations Antibacterial and antifungal prophylaxis is recommended for patients who are at high risk of infection, including patients who are expected to have profound, protracted neutropenia, which is defined as < 100 neutrophils/µL for > 7 days or other risk factors. Herpes simplex virus–seropositive patients undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation or leukemia induction therapy should receive nucleoside analog-based antiviral prophylaxis, such as acyclovir. Pneumocystis jirovecii prophylaxis is recommended for patients receiving chemotherapy regimens that are associated with a > 3.5% risk for pneumonia as a result of this organism (eg, those with ≥ 20 mg prednisone equivalents daily for ≥ 1 month or on the basis of purine analog usage). Treatment with a nucleoside reverse transcription inhibitor (eg, entecavir or tenofovir) is recommended for patients at high risk of hepatitis B virus reactivation. Recommendations for vaccination and avoidance of prolonged contact with environments that have high concentrations of airborne fungal spores are also provided within the updated guideline. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/supportive-care-guidelines .

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (34) ◽  
pp. 5471-5489 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eyal Robenshtok ◽  
Anat Gafter-Gvili ◽  
Elad Goldberg ◽  
Miriam Weinberger ◽  
Moshe Yeshurun ◽  
...  

Purpose To evaluate the effect of antifungal prophylaxis on all-cause mortality as primary outcome, invasive fungal infections (IFIs), and adverse events. Many studies have evaluated the role of antifungal prophylaxis in cancer patients, with inconsistent conclusions. Methods We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials comparing systemic antifungals with placebo, no intervention, or other antifungal agents for prophylaxis in cancer patients after chemotherapy. The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, conference proceedings, and references were searched. Two reviewers independently appraised the quality of trials and extracted data. Results Sixty-four trials met inclusion criteria. Antifungal prophylaxis decreased all-cause mortality significantly at end of follow-up compared with placebo, no treatment, or nonsystemic antifungals (relative risk [RR], 0.84; 95% CI, 0.74 to 0.95). In allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT) recipients, prophylaxis reduced all-cause mortality (RR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.85), fungal-related mortality, and documented IFI. In acute leukemia patients, there was a significant reduction in fungal-related mortality and documented IFI, whereas the difference in mortality was only borderline significant (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.06). Prophylaxis with itraconazole suspension reduced documented IFI when compared with fluconazole, with no difference in survival, and at the cost of more adverse events. On the basis of two studies, posaconazole prophylaxis reduced all-cause mortality (RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.98), fungal-related mortality, and IFI when compared with fluconazole. Conclusion Antifungal prophylaxis decreases all-cause mortality significantly in patients after chemotherapy. Antifungal prophylaxis should be administered to patients undergoing allogeneic HSCT, and should probably be administered to high-risk acute leukemia patients.


2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (27) ◽  
pp. 3205-3216
Author(s):  
Thomas Lehrnbecher ◽  
Brian T. Fisher ◽  
Bob Phillips ◽  
Melissa Beauchemin ◽  
Fabianne Carlesse ◽  
...  

PURPOSE To develop a clinical practice guideline for systemic antifungal prophylaxis in pediatric patients with cancer and hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT) recipients. METHODS Recommendations were developed by an international multidisciplinary panel that included a patient advocate. We conducted a systematic review of systemic antifungal prophylaxis in children and adults with cancer and HSCT recipients. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach was used to make strong or weak recommendations and to classify level of evidence as high, moderate, low, or very low. The panel considered directness of the data to pediatric patients. RESULTS There were 68 randomized trials included in the systematic review, of which 6 (9%) were conducted in a solely pediatric population. Strong recommendations were made to administer systemic antifungal prophylaxis to children and adolescents receiving treatment of acute myeloid leukemia, to those undergoing allogeneic HSCT pre-engraftment, and to those receiving systemic immunosuppression for graft-versus-host disease treatment. A strong recommendation was made to administer a mold-active agent with an echinocandin or a mold-active azole when systemic antifungal prophylaxis is warranted. For children younger than 13 years of age, an echinocandin, voriconazole, or itraconazole is suggested. Posaconazole may also be used in those age 13 years or older. A strong recommendation against routine administration of amphotericin as systemic antifungal prophylaxis was made. CONCLUSION We developed a clinical practice guideline for systemic antifungal prophylaxis administration in pediatric patients with cancer and HSCT recipients. Implementation and assessment of guideline-concordant rates and impacts are important future steps.


2020 ◽  
Vol 87 ◽  
pp. 102032
Author(s):  
Tara D. Baetz ◽  
Glenn G. Fletcher ◽  
Gregory Knight ◽  
Elaine McWhirter ◽  
Sudha Rajagopal ◽  
...  

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 29-30
Author(s):  
Muhammad Salman Faisal ◽  
Laila Hashim ◽  
Yazan Samhouri ◽  
Syed Maaz Abdullah ◽  
Ahsan Wahab ◽  
...  

Background and Objective: Disease relapse remains the primary cause of morbidity and mortality following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (Allo-HSCT) in patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Oral azacitidine (5-aza) was associated with clinical benefit as maintenance therapy in transplant ineligible patients. However, contradicting data have been reported regarding the role of 5-aza as a maintenance therapy to reduce relapse rate -post-allo-HSCT. We conducted this systematic review to describe the efficacy and safety of 5-aza in this context. Materials and Methods: We systematically searched multiple databases, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Clinicaltrials.gov. We also searched major conferences for oral or poster presentations. We used MeSH terms and keywords for MDS, AML, Allo-HSCT, and 5-aza. We included all retrospective and prospective studies of 5-aza (all formulations) published until March 2020. The primary database search yielded 1209 articles. We excluded irrelevant, duplicate, and review articles. The final search revealed 20 articles that we explored in detail for various efficacy and safety outcomes. Results: A total of 1211 patients were enrolled in 14 prospective and 6 retrospective studies. Of those, 1169 patients were evaluable. Prospective studies CALGB 100801 trial by Vij et al. (2015) reported overall survival (OS) of 45.7% and progression-free survival (PFS) of 41.2% at 24 months following reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) in a phase 2 trial of 41 patients. In a randomized control trial, Oran et al. (2018) evaluated relapse-free survival (RFS) as the primary outcome after 12 cycles of 5-aza at 32 mg/m2/day (n=187). Only 30% of the patients in the azacitidine arm completed the targeted number of cycles. The study showed a median RFS of 24.8 months in the treatment arm vs 15.3 months in the control arm (p=0.43). In a phase 2 trial conducted by Guillaume, T et al. (2019) the cumulative incidence of relapse was 27.6% in patients who received 5-aza, compared with 41.9% in 58 matched patients control group (p=0.21). Platzbecker et al. (2018-2019) studied a higher dose of azacitidine (75mg/m2/day) in a phase 2 trial as a pre-emptive strategy for patients who develop minimal residual disease (MRD) within 24 months. The 12-month OS and PFS were 94% and 44%, respectively. De Lima et al. (2018) studied the role of maintenance Oral 5-aza in Phase I/II trial (n=30). A dose-escalation design was used with a dosage ranging from 150 mg to 400 mg, received in a 7- or 14-day cycles. The 12-month PFS was 54% and 72% and estimated survival was 86% and 81% among 7-days and 14-days cycles, respectively. (Table 1) Retrospective studies: Mishra et al. (2017) reported a better OS in 14 patients who received 5-aza maintenance compared with a control arm (p-value 0.026). Cheikh et al. reported a 12-month OS of 70%. Ali, N et al. (2020) (n=107) compared 5-aza group vs. control group retrospectively. EFS was 53.1% vs. 49.5% (p=0.02) while OS was 56.8 and 53.4 months (p=0.01) in the treatment arm vs the control arm respectively. Safety: The most common grade 3 or 4 hematological adverse effect was neutropenia, while some patients also experienced grade 3 or 4 anemia, thrombocytopenia, or lymphopenia. The main non-hematological adverse effects were infections, fatigue, and gastrointestinal distress. The incidence of acute graft versus host disease varied from 13% to 50%. The most common reason for treatment discontinuation was disease relapse. A minority of patients discontinued treatment due to side effects. Conclusion: To our knowledge, this is the first comprehensive systematic review for the role of 5-aza maintenance -post-Allo-HSCT in patients with MDS or AML. The heterogeneity of the studies, in terms of dosing regimens, variable duration of treatment and patient selection, precludes definitive conclusions. Despite that, 5-aza seems to improve relapse rates and OS at least numerically but also significantly in some studies, as illustrated in this review. Low number of patients involved in most of these studies contributed to non-significant p-values. Azacitidine remains a valid and safe option, especially in patients with high risk of relapse. Further studies aiming at those high risk patients, such as AML with myelodysplasia related changes (AML-MRC) and high-risk MDS following RIC, are of utmost need. Disclosures Anwer: Incyte, Seattle Genetics, Acetylon Pharmaceuticals, AbbVie Pharma, Astellas Pharma, Celegene, Millennium Pharmaceuticals.: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Fazal:Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Agios: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Gilead/Kite: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Stemline: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Speakers Bureau; Jazz: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau.


Blood ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 104 (11) ◽  
pp. 1337-1337 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johan A. Maertens ◽  
Hedy Teppler ◽  
Robert Lupinacci ◽  
Michael Bourque ◽  
Mark DiNubile ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: In a double-blind randomized trial of empirical antifungal Rx for persistently febrile neutropenic pts, CAS was as effective as and better tolerated than L-AmB. We now examine the results of this study in the subgroup of pts with AML. Methods: Randomization to CAS (70 mg x 1, then 50 mg/d) or L-AmB (3 mg/kg/d) was stratified by risk category [high risk = allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant or relapsed acute leukemia] and use of antifungal prophylaxis. The primary efficacy endpoint was % of treated pts with documented fever and neutropenia who had a successful outcome defined by all the following: successful Rx of baseline (BL) invasive fungal infection (IFI) (if any), no breakthrough (BT) IFI to 7 d post-Rx, survival @7d post-Rx, no premature discontinuation (DC) due to lack of efficacy or study drug toxicity, and fever resolution x 48 hr during neutropenia. Results: 703/1095 (64%) of the treated pts had AML, including 364/556 (65%) and 339/539 (63%) in the CAS and L-AmB groups, respectively. Demographic characteristics were similar in AML pts in both Rx groups. 27% of CAS and 22% of L-AmB pts with AML were high risk. Median days of Rx were: CAS, 12; L-AmB, 11. The table shows % AML pts with a successful outcome by Rx group. % AML pts with a successful outcome by Rx group CAS (N=364) L-AmB (N=339) Difference (CAS - L-AmB) 95% CI for difference between treatment groups † 7/14 CAS and 5/16 L-AmB pts had successful Rx of BL IFI. Success Rx of BL IFI † 50 31 19 (−16, 53) No BT IFI 93 95 −2 (−5, 2) Suvival @ 7d post-Rx 92 88 4 (0, 8) No premature DC 87 86 2 (−3, 7) Fever resolution 48 46 2 (−5, 9) All of the above 40 38 2 (−5, 10) The composite success rates for the high risk AML pts were 46/99 (46%) for CAS and 31/76 (41%) for L-AmB. Conclusions: In this post hoc subgroup analysis, CAS provided an effective and generally well-tolerated option for the empirical Rx of persistently febrile neutropenic pts with AML.


Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 4547-4547
Author(s):  
Olga Pérez ◽  
Manuela Aguilar ◽  
Almudena Martín ◽  
Jose Falantes ◽  
Isabel Montero ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 4547 Background Fungal infections remain a vital threat to the immunocompromised patient. Due to the high mortality rate of invasive mycoses, antifungal prophylaxis and prevention appear appropriate in some settings. Patients (pts) with prolonged and severe neutropenia or recipients of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) appear to be at high risk for filamentous fungal infections, which are associated with low survival rates. However, there is no consensus on the optimal prophylaxis, eligible patients or its effectiveness and clinical impact. Objective To analyze the need for antifungal prophylaxis in Acute Leukemia patients receiving chemotherapy and the effectiveness of fluconazol, followed by posaconazol if GVHD developed, in recipients of allo-HSCT as antifungal prophylaxis. Methods and patients Period: from june’07 through june’09. Acute leukemia adult patients receiving chemotherapy as induction or re-induction therapy did not received primary antifungal prophylaxis. Recipientes of Allo-HSCT received 400 mg/d of fluconazole until discharge followed by 200 mg/8h of posaconazole if graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) developed, until its resolution. Patients received secondary antifungal prophylaxis according to their IFI. There were 77 pts who presented 218 episodes of post-chemotherapy neutropenia (80 in ALL and 138 in AML), 207 received no antifungal prophylaxis. On the other hand, we analyzed 40 consecutive Allo-HSCT adult recipients with an average age of 39 years (15-65) followed as in-patient and out-patient basis during a mean period of 18 months (3-24). Standard myeloablative or reduced intensity conditioning schemes were used and donors were HLA-identical sibling (27), unrelated donor (8) and umbilical cord blood (5). Diagnoses: AML (21), ALL (10), NHL (3), MDS (2), CML (2), HL (1) and AAS (1). The GVHD prophylaxis was according to standard protocols with MTX and CsP/MMF or standard umbilical cord blood protocols. Non-normal distribution data were expressed as median values (range). Chi-square test or Fisher exact test were used to compare differences between groups of categorical data. Differences were considered statistically significant for p-values < 0.05. All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 16.0 software (Chicago, IL). Results Acute leukemia patients: There were 8 proved or probable fungal infections (EORTC/MSG consensus), with an incidence of 3.6%. The incidence of IFI in the whole induction AML group was 2.4%, (6.9% in the consolidation AML group, 25% in the re-induction AML group) and 5.2% in induction LLA and no case (0%) in the re-induction ALL group. As etiology, Aspergillus Fumigatus (1), Aspergillus spp (4), Candida tropicalis (1) and Candida spp (2). There were 3 deaths caused by IFI (37.5% of IFI); two of them in the re-induction AML group. Allogenic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation recipients: 33 patients received fluconazole (82.5%) and 4 pts (10%) fluconazole followed by posaconazole. Other 3 received posaconazole (2) or voriconazole 200 mg/12 hours (1) as secondary prophylaxis since the conditioning. There were 7 cases of IFI (incidence of 17.5%), 3 proved IFIs and 4 probable IFIs. As etiology, Aspergillus Fumigatus (2), Aspergillus spp (4) and Candida albicans (1). Six patients had received fluconazole and one (candidiasis), fluconazole and posaconazole. The mortality attributable to IFI were 4 cases (57% of IFI). There was no IFI in the group of 9 pts without GVHD and all IFIs occurred in patients treated for GVHD. Conclusions 1) Patients in re-induction of AML may require an effective prophylaxis against fungal infections, but not AML during induction or ALL in any situation. 2) The prophylaxis regimen studied in allogenic HSCT recipients was effective in preventing IFIs in patients without GVHD but not in patients with GVHD, particularly in the case of filamentous fungi. 3) The overall incidence of IFI in allo-HSCT was similar to that reported in other series of high risk and mortality from IFI similar to that described in recent years. 4) Patients with GVHD require more effective antifungal prophylaxis regimens and are candidates for clinical trials. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 4490-4490
Author(s):  
Chi-Cheng Li ◽  
Jih-Luh Tang ◽  
Chien Ting Lin ◽  
Bor Sheng Ko ◽  
Ming Yao ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 4490 Purpose Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT) may rescue patients with acute myeloid and lymphoblastic leukemia (AML/ALL) even in high risk disease. Little has been investigated about prognostic impact of pre- and post-transplant residual disease (RD) status, hematogones (HG) level and natural killer (NK) cells level in the adult patients with acute leukemia. Materials & Methods We retrospectively studied 45 consecutive adult patients, including 31 AML and 14 ALL, receiving allo-SCT at National Taiwan University Hospital. Based on disease status at transplant, 18 patients were in standard risk; 16 in intermediate risk; and 11 in high risk disease. 28 patients underwent myeloablative conditioning and 17 received reduced-intensity SCT. Bone marrow samples were obtained both before conditioning therapy (pre-SCT) and at hemogram recovery after transplantation (post-SCT). RD, HG level and NK cells level were evaluated by multidimensional flow cytometry. Leukemia-free survival (LFS) was estimated by using Kaplan-Meier method. Results Pre-SCT RD-negative (RD-) was shown in 26 patients and RD-positive (RD+) in 19 patients; whereas post-SCT RD- was found in 39 patients and RD+ in 6 patients. Level of pre-SCT RD status ranges from 0–90% and level of post-SCT RD status ranges from 0–3%. Estimated one-year LFS were 71.8% in pre-SCT RD- compared to 0% in pre-SCT RD+ group (P=0.008, Fig. 1). In post-SCT flow cytometric analysis, one-year LFS were 33.2% in post-SCT RD- versus 25.0% in post-SCT RD+ group (P=0.002, Fig. 2). After combining pre- and post-SCT RD status, three groups of patients were identified; pre-SCT RD&minus;/post-SCT RD- (n=26), pre-SCT RD+/post-SCT RD- (n=13), and pre-SCT RD+/post-SCT RD+ (n=6). The classification further stratify the patients into different groups with distinct outcome (P=0.003, Fig. 3). We also found the median HG 0.2% (range 0–12%) and 0.1% (range 0–2.1%) and median NK cells 1.8% (range 0.2–20%) and 1.8% (0.02–15.5%) pre-SCT and post-SCT, respectively. The patients with higher NK cells, either pre-SCT or post-SCT, had longer LFS (P<0.001 and 0.004, continuous variables, respectively). Conclusion Our data suggest both pre- and post-SCT RD status and NK cells level could predict the transplant outcome. Further large-scale studies may be needed to confirm this point. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 4335-4335
Author(s):  
Raffaella Greco ◽  
Maria Chiara Barbanti ◽  
Alessandra Forcina ◽  
Maria Teresa Lupo Stanghellini ◽  
Fabio Giglio ◽  
...  

Abstract Invasive fungal infections (IFI) have emerged as a leading cause of morbidity and infection-related mortality among allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) recipients over the past two decades. Several new drugs have recently been introduced as antifungal prophylaxis, supported by results of prospective randomized trials. In agreement with the international guidelines, a mold-active antifungal prophylaxis is strongly recommended in high-risk patients receiving allo-HSCT, considering efficacy, different pharmacokinetic, drug-drug interactions, and toxicity profile of the various antifungal drugs. Posaconazole, a triazole with broad-spectrum antifungal activity and a favorable toxicity profile, is the drug of choice for patients with graft versus host disease (GVHD). Consequently, posaconazole prophylaxis in allo-HSCT recipients is administered in combination with immunosuppressive drugs for GVHD prophylaxis and/or treatment, most commonly cyclosporine (CsA) or tacrolimus. Sirolimus is an inhibitor of mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), largely used for GVHD prevention and treatment, but extensively metabolized by CYP3A4. As posaconazole strongly inhibits CYP3A4 its coadministration with sirolimus is contraindicated by the manufacturer of posaconazole, and up to now poorly described in literature. In the San Raffaele Haematology and Bone Marrow Transplantation Unit, from 2010 to 2015, we retrospectively identified sixty-six patients that received posaconazole oral suspension as primary (n=43) or secondary (n=23) antifungal prophylaxis after allo-HSCT. The majority of patients were affected by acute leukaemia (67%), not in remission at time of allo-HSCT (55%), and with a previous allo-HSCT reported for 50% of them, carrying an high risk for developing a post-transplant IFI. Median follow up was 357 days (range 43-1884) after HSCT. Posaconazole administration was given for a median of 221 days (range 13-966). Thirty-two patients (49%) received posaconazole during engraftment phase, while 28 (42%) and 19 (29%) patients for IFI prophylaxis in the setting of acute or chronic GvHD respectively. A concomitant administration of sirolimus was performed in 49 patients (74%). Sirolimus concentrations were monitored two times a week, while posaconazole was controlled in patients' serum on a weekly basis, during the first two months of treatment. We observed a 55-70% steady-state dose reduction of sirolimus in 19 patients, after posaconazole introduction. Alternatively, patients with ongoing posaconazole prophylaxis received an initial empiric sirolimus dose reduction at 1 mg/day. The co-administration of posaconazole and sirolimus resulted safe. Discontinuation was reported mainly in patients with documented IFI, who required a change of the antifungal drug. No adverse events potentially associated with sirolimus overexposure (i.e. sinusoidal obstructive syndrome, sirolimus-related thrombotic microangiopathy) were reported, although one-third of the patients experienced a transient and moderate elevation of sirolimus serum levels in the first week of coadministration. In this analysis post-transplant IFI occurred in 14 cases. The risk of developing IFI was influenced by type of prophylaxis, resulting in 12% and 39% of IFI during primary and secondary prophylaxis respectively (p value 0.013; OR 4.89, CI 1.39-17.11). However the most significant and strong association was reported in concomitant with insufficient posaconazole serum levels (<0.5 ml/L), a known reported limitation of the oral solution formulation especially in patients with intestinal GVHD and/or diarrhea (p value <0,0001; OR 35.14, CI 6.43-192). In patients with adequate posaconazole serum levels (>0.5 ml/L) the incidence of IFI was 5%, supporting the utility of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) in such conditions and generating interest for the use of the upcoming posaconazole tablets with improved bioavailability in allo-HSCT recipients. In our experience concurrent sirolimus and posaconazole use was well tolerated, with a 55% to 70% sirolimus dose reduction at posaconazole initiation and close monitoring of serum sirolimus and posaconazole trough levels in the first months of co-administration. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document