Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20166083›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2010

Antifungal therapy in infants and children with proven, probable or suspected invasive fungal infections.

Christopher C Blyth, Katherine Hale, Pamela Palasanthiran, Tracey O'Brien, Michael H Bennett

Open access · greenAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 56 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Antifungal therapy for newborn infants with invasive fungal infection.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012
    Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Critical review of current clinical practice guidelines for antifungal therapy in paediatric haematology and oncology.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2017
    Article
  11. Management of Invasive Fungal Infections in Pediatric Acute Leukemia and the Appropriate Time for Restarting Chemotherapy.Turkish journal of haematology : official journal of Turkish Society of Haematology · 2015
    Article
  12. Article
  13. A case of pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia with invasive candidiasis: short review.Indian journal of hematology & blood transfusion : an official journal of Indian Society of Hematology and Blood Transfusion · 2014
    Article
  14. A comparison of bronchoalveolar lavage versus lung biopsy in pediatric recipients after stem cell transplantation.Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation · 2014
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Christopher C BlythCentre for Infectious Disease and Microbiology, ICPMR, Westmead Hospital, Darcy Road, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia, 2145.
Katherine Hale
Pamela Palasanthiran
Tracey O'Brien
Michael H Bennett
Sydney Children's Hospital · AUChildren's Hospital at Westmead · AUPrince of Wales Hospital · AUUniversity of Western Australia · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInvasive fungal infections are associated with significant morbidity and mortality in children. Optimal treatment strategies are yet to be defined.

objectivesThis review aims to systematically identify and summarise the effects of different antifungal therapies in children with proven, probable or suspected invasive fungal infections. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2008, Issue 3), MEDLINE (1966 to September 2008), EMBASE (1980 to September 2008) and CINAHL (1988 to September 2008) without language restrictions. We also handsearched reference lists and abstracts of conference proceedings and scientific meetings, and contacted authors of included studies and pharmaceutical manufacturers. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised clinical trials (RCTs) comparing a systemic antifungal agent with a comparator (including placebo) in children (one month to 16 years) with proven, probable or suspected invasive fungal infection. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently applied selection criteria, performed quality assessment, and extracted data using an intention-to-treat approach. We synthesised data using the random-effects model and expressed results as relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). MAIN

resultsWe included seven trials of antifungal agents in children with prolonged fever and neutropenia (suspected fungal infection) and candidaemia or invasive candidiasis (proven fungal infection). Four trials compared a lipid preparation of amphotericin B with conventional amphotericin B (395 participants), one trial compared an echinocandin with a lipid preparation of amphotericin B (82 participants) in suspected infection; one trial compared an echinocandin with a lipid preparation of amphotericin B in children with candidaemia or invasive candidiasis (109 participants) and one trial compared different azole antifungals in children with candidaemia (43 participants). No difference in all-cause mortality and other primary endpoints (mortality related to fungal infection or complete resolution of fungal infections) were observed. No difference in breakthrough fungal infection was observed in children with prolonged fever and neutropenia.When lipid preparations and conventional amphotericin B were compared in children with prolonged fever and neutropenia, nephrotoxicity was less frequently observed with a lipid preparation (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.90, P = 0.02) however substantial heterogeneity was observed (I(2) = 59%, P = 0.06). Children receiving liposomal amphotericin B were less likely to develop infusion-related reactions compared with conventional amphotericin B (chills: RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.64, P = 0.0005). Children receiving a colloidal dispersion were more likely to develop such reactions than with liposomal amphotericin B (chills: RR 1.76, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.85, P = 0.02). The rate of other clinically significant adverse reactions attributed to the antifungal agent (total reactions; total reactions leading to treatment discontinuation, dose reduction or change in therapy; hypokalaemia and hepatotoxicity) were not significantly different. When echinocandins and lipid preparations were compared, the rate of clinically significant adverse reactions (total reactions; total reactions leading to treatment discontinuation, dose reduction or change in therapy) were not significantly different. AUTHORS'

conclusionsLimited paediatric data are available comparing antifungal agents in children with proven, probable or suspected invasive fungal infection. No differences in mortality or treatment efficacy were observed when antifungal agents were compared. Children are less likely to develop nephrotoxicity with a lipid preparation of amphotericin B compared with conventional amphotericin B. Further comparative paediatric antifungal drug trials and epidemiological and pharmacological studies are required highlighting the differences between neonates, children and adults with invasive fungal infections.

Indexed as

AdolescentAmphotericin BAntifungal AgentsCandidiasisChildChild, PreschoolEchinocandinsFeverHumansInfantMycosesNeutropeniaRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicAmphotericin BAntifungal AgentsEchinocandinsliposomal amphotericin B

Identifiers

PMID20166083
PMCPMC10576261
OpenAlexW2131161452

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.