Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12076388›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2002

Amphotericin B versus fluconazole for controlling fungal infections in neutropenic cancer patients.

H K Johansen, P C Gøtzsche

Abstract readComparative StudySystematic 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, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 7 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, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Antifungal therapy for newborn infants with invasive fungal infection.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Journal of medical microbiology · 2025
    Article
  9. Water-Soluble Nystatin and Derivative.ACS medicinal chemistry letters · 2022
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Section 4: Contrast-induced AKI.Kidney international supplements · 2012
    Article
  13. Section 3: Prevention and Treatment of AKI.Kidney international supplements · 2012
    Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Invasive fungal infection in very low birthweight infants: national prospective surveillance study.Archives of disease in childhood. Fetal and neonatal edition · 2006
    Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

H K JohansenThe Nordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet, Dept. 7112, Blegdamsvej 9, DK-2100 Copenhagen Ø, Denmark. hkj@cochrane.dk
P C Gøtzsche

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.

objectivesTo compare the effect of fluconazole and amphotericin B on morbidity and mortality in patients with cancer complicated by neutropenia. SEARCH STRATEGY: MEDLINE and Cochrane Library (November 2001). Letters, abstracts, and unpublished trials. The industry and authors were contacted. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised trials comparing fluconazole with amphotericin B. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data on mortality, invasive fungal infection, colonisation, use of additional (escape) antifungal therapy and adverse effects leading to discontinuation of therapy were extracted by both authors independently. MAIN

resultsSixteen trials (3760 patients, 341 deaths) were included. In 3 large 3-armed trials, results for amphotericin B were combined with results for nystatin in a "polyene" group. Because nystatin is an ineffective drug in these circumstances, this approach creates a bias in favour of fluconazole. Furthermore, most patients were randomised to oral amphotericin B, which is poorly absorbed and poorly documented. It was unclear whether there was overlap among the "polyene" trials. We were unable to obtain any information to clarify these issues from the trial authors or from Pfizer, the manufacturer of fluconazole. There were no significant differences in effect between fluconazole and amphotericin B, but the confidence intervals were wide. More patients dropped out of the study when they received amphotericin B, but as none of the trials were blinded, decisions on premature interruption of therapy could have been biased. Furthermore, amphotericin B was rarely given under optimal circumstances, with premedication to reduce infusion-related toxicity, slow infusion, and with potassium and magnesium supplements to prevent nephrotoxicity. REVIEWER'S

conclusionsAmphotericin B had been disfavoured in several of the trials through their design or analysis. Since intravenous amphotericin B is the only antifungal agent for which there is good evidence suggesting an effect on mortality and is considerably cheaper than fluconazole, it should be preferred.

Indexed as

Amphotericin BAntifungal AgentsConfidence IntervalsFluconazoleHumansMycosesNeoplasmsNeutropeniaOdds RatioRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAmphotericin BAntifungal AgentsFluconazole

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.