ReviewAdvances in experimental medicine and biology2009
Febrile neutropenia in children with cancer.
Review in Advances in experimental medicine and biology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Successful Management of Pediatric Patients with Low-Risk Febrile Neutropenia Using a Clinical Care Pathway in Egypt.Infection & chemotherapy · 2025Article
- Imaging of acute and subacute toxicities of cancer therapy in children.Pediatric radiology · 2016Review
- Diagnostic value of routine chest radiography in febrile, neutropenic children for early detection of pneumonia and mould infections.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There is a need for increased consensus in the definition of fever and neutropenia, the approach to risk stratification (including outpatient therapy and early discharge) and choices of empiric antimicrobial therapy in children. There has been an increased incidence of Gram positive infection in FN patients, in particular with VGS in patient with AML. However, Gram negative bacteria are still responsible for most of the mortality associated with FN. Piperacillin/tazobactam, cefipime, or meropenem are all effective first-choice antimicrobial monotherapy in FN. There is no good evidence for adding an aminoglycoside compound to the initial empiric therapy regimen. Following local microbiological data is of utmost importance in choosing the right empiric antimicrobial regimen for a particular institution. Outpatient management of a well-defined subset of low-risk patient for bacterial invasive infection with intravenous ceftriaxone or oral ciprofloxacin and daily re-evaluation is possible. Early CT of the chest (after 5-7 days of FN) in high-risk patients is essential to make a prompt diagnosis of pulmonary aspergillosis and improve outcome.
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.