SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2002
Routine versus selective antifungal administration for control of fungal infections in patients with cancer.
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.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Amphotericin B lipid soluble formulations versus amphotericin B in cancer patients with neutropenia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014Pooled it
- Nystatin prophylaxis and treatment in severely immunodepressed patients.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014Pooled it
- Amphotericin B versus fluconazole for controlling fungal infections in neutropenic cancer patients.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014Pooled it
- Routine versus selective antifungal administration for control of fungal infections in patients with cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014Pooled it
- Voriconazole versus amphotericin B or fluconazole in cancer patients with neutropenia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014Pooled it
- Interventions for treating oral candidiasis for patients with cancer receiving treatment.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2010Pooled it
- Interventions for preventing oral candidiasis for patients with cancer receiving treatment.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2007Pooled it
- Antifungal agents for preventing fungal infections in solid organ transplant recipients.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2004Pooled it
- Trial
- Palliative dental care- a boon for debilitating.Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR · 2014Review
- Insights into and relative effect of chitosan-H, chitosan-H-propolis, chitosan-H-propolis-nystatin and chitosan-H-nystatin on dentine bond strength.European journal of dentistry · 2013Article
- Treatment and prophylaxis of invasive candidiasis.Seminars in perinatology · 2012Review
- Fungal infection-related mortality versus total mortality as an outcome in trials of antifungal agents.BMC medical research methodology · 2006Review
- Invasive fungal infection in very low birthweight infants: national prospective surveillance study.Archives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition · 2006Article
- Article
- Choices aplenty: antifungal prophylaxis in hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients.Bone marrow transplantation · 2004Review
- How We Incorporate Venetoclax in Treatment Regimens for Acute Myeloid Leukemia.Cancer journal (Sudbury, Mass.)Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Updated by
- Update of
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
Identifiers
12076377What 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.