ArticleInfection2019
Daptomycin vs. glycopeptides in the treatment of febrile neutropenia: results of the Izmir matched cohort study.
Article in Infection, 2019. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- The clinical features, treatment and prognosis of neutropenic fever and Coronavirus disease 2019 results of the multicentre teos study.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Article
- Multifunctional Pharmaceutical Effects of the Antibiotic Daptomycin.BioMed research international · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors at 13 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIn this multicentre, retrospective, matched cohort study we aimed to evaluate the outcomes of neutropenic fever cases that were treated with daptomycin or a glycopeptide (vancomycin or teicoplanin).
methodsData and outcomes of adult (aged > 18-years old) patients with neutropenic fever [(1) without clinical and radiological evidence of pneumonia, (2) who were treated with daptomycin or a glycopeptide (teicoplanin or vancomycin) for any reason and for at least 72 h] were extracted from the hospital databases. Matching was performed with all of the three following criteria: (1) underlying disease, (2) reason for starting daptomycin or glycopeptide (microbiologic evidence vs. microbiologic evidence, clinical infection vs. clinical infection and empirical therapy vs. empirical therapy) and (3) neutropenic status.
resultsOverall 128 patients [(69/123) (56.1%) in the daptomycin cohort (D) and 59/123 (48%) in the glycopeptide cohort (G)] had a resolution of fever at the end of 72 h antibiotic treatment (p = 0.25). There was no significant difference in cured, improved and (cured + improved) rates between (D) and (G) cohorts as well as fever of unknown origin cases or microbiologically confirmed infections or clinically defined infections subgroups (p > 0.05). There was also no significant difference (p > 0.05), in terms of persistent response in the (D) versus (G) cohorts,
conclusionsThese findings suggest that although not better, daptomycin efficacy is comparable to vancomycin if used as empiric therapy in the treatment of adult febrile neutropenia. We conclude that daptomycin may be used at least as a salvage therapy alternative to glycopeptides in the treatment of adult febrile neutropenia cases. A large, randomized-controlled trial may further consolidate the evidence related to this question.
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.