ReviewPharmacoEconomics1999
Clinical and economic considerations of empirical antibacterial therapy of febrile neutropenia in cancer.
Review in PharmacoEconomics, 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Resource utilization and cost of episodes of febrile neutropenia in children with acute leukemias and lymphomas.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2003Article
- Cost effectiveness of cephalosporin monotherapy and aminoglycoside/ureidopenicillin combination therapy. For the treatment of febrile episodes in neutropenic patients.PharmacoEconomics · 2000Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Febrile neutropenia is a condition that can develop in patients with cancer following the administration of myelosuppressive chemotherapy or radiation therapy. The current standard of patient management involves the empirical use of a combination of antibacterials or a single broad spectrum agent to offer extensive antibacterial coverage of both Gram-positive and Gram-negative micro-organisms. Over the past 25 years, febrile neutropenia has changed from a condition that was fatal in over 50% of patients to a condition with an infection-related mortality rate of less than 10%. A major reason behind these extraordinary advances in patient care has been the many well-designed randomised trials of empirical antibacterial therapy that have been conducted over this period of time. In contrast to this finding, a review of the literature revealed limited economic data on the empirical treatment of febrile neutropenia in patients with cancer. Therefore, there is a definite need to conduct more pharmacoeconomic research in this area and to develop methods of implementing the findings of such studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.