Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12076377›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2002

Routine versus selective antifungal administration for control of fungal infections in patients with cancer.

P C Gotzsche, H K Johansen

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Nystatin prophylaxis and treatment in severely immunodepressed patients.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Palliative dental care- a boon for debilitating.Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR · 2014
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Invasive fungal infection in very low birthweight infants: national prospective surveillance study.Archives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition · 2006
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

P C GotzscheThe Nordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet, Dept. 7112, Blegdamsvej 9, DK-2100 Copenhagen Ø, Denmark, 2200. p.c.gotzsche@cochrane.dk
H K Johansen

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSystemic fungal infection is considered to be an important cause of morbidity and mortality in cancer patients, particularly those with neutropenia. Antifungal drugs are often given prophylactically, or to patients with persistent fever.

objectivesThe objective of this review was to assess the effect of antifungal drugs in cancer patients with neutropenia. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register and MEDLINE (November 2001) and the reference lists of articles. We searched the proceedings of the ICAAC (from 1990 to 2001, General Meeting of the ASM (from 1990 to 2001), and the European Congress of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (1995 to 2001) and contacted researchers in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials of amphotericin B, fluconazole, ketoconazole, miconazole, or itraconazole compared with placebo or no treatment in cancer patients with neutropenia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently assessed trial eligibility, methodological quality and abstracted data. MAIN

resultsThirty trials involving 4094 patients were included. Prophylactic or empirical treatment with antifungals as a group had no statistically significant effect on mortality (relative risk 0.95, 95% confidence interval 0.82 to 1.11). The relative risk was smallest for amphotericin B, 0.73 (0.52 to 1.03) (P=0.08). In another review, three trials compared intravenous lipid soluble amphotericin B (AmBisome) with smaller doses of standard intravenous amphotericin B; the relative risk was 0.74 (0.52 to 1.07). Taken together, these results indicate that intravenous amphotericin B might decrease mortality. In contrast, trials with fluconazole, ketoconazole, miconazole and itraconazole failed to find an effect on mortality. The incidence of invasive fungal infection decreased significantly with administration of amphotericin B (relative risk 0.39, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.76), fluconazole (0.39, 0.27 to 0.57) and itraconazole (0.51, 0.27 to 0.96), but not with miconazole or ketoconazole. REVIEWER'S

conclusionsIntravenous amphotericin B is the only antifungal agent for which there is evidence suggesting that it might reduce mortality. It should therefore be preferred when prophylactic or empirical antifungal therapy in cancer patients with neutropenia is considered indicated.

Indexed as

Antifungal AgentsHumansImmunocompromised HostMycosesNeoplasmsNeutropeniaOpportunistic InfectionsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAntifungal Agents

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.