SynthesisMedicine2020
Efficacy and safety of cefoperazone-sulbactam in empiric therapy for febrile neutropenia: A systemic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Factors influencing hospital length of stay in febrile neutropenia: A retrospective cohort study of Turkish patients with solid tumors.Medicine · 2025Observational
- Effectiveness and Safety of High-Dose versus Standard-Dose Cefoperazone-Sulbactam in Severe Infections: A Multicenter Retrospective Study.Infection and drug resistance · 2025Article
- Multicenter study on clinical outcomes and poor prognostic factors in patients with Klebsiella pneumoniae bacteremia receiving cefoperazone/sulbactam treatment.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2024Article
- Novel Siderophore Cephalosporin and Combinations of Cephalosporins with β-Lactamase Inhibitors as an Advancement in Treatment of Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Correlation Between Cefoperazone/Sulbactam MIC Values and Clinical Outcomes of Escherichia coli Bacteremia.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2022Article
- Optimal Dose of Cefoperazone-Sulbactam for Acute Bacterial Infection in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis meta-analysis assessed the clinical efficacy and safety of cefoperazone-sulbactam for empiric therapy febrile neutropenia.
methodsThe PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCO, Cochrane Library, Ovid Medline, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrial.gov database were searched through May 10, 2019. Only clinical trials comparing cefoperazone-sulbactam with other antibiotics for empiric treatment of febrile neutropenia were included. The primary outcome was treatment success without modification, and the secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality and adverse events (AEs).
resultsTen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 1 retrospective cohort study were included. Overall, cefoperazone-sulbactam exhibited a treatment success rate similar to those of comparator drugs for the treatment of febrile neutropenia (odds ratio [OR], 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.24, I = 0%). A similar finding was noted in pooled analysis of 10 RCTs (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.30, I = 0%). Subgroup analysis showed that cefoperazone-sulbactam had a treatment success rate similar to the rates of comparators for adults (OR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.38, I = 0%) and children (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.46, I = 0%). Cefoperazone-sulbactam did not differ significantly from comparators in the risks of all-cause mortality (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.58 to 1.58, I = 0%) or common AEs, namely rash, nausea/vomiting, and superinfection.
conclusionThe clinical efficacy and tolerability of cefoperazone-sulbactam are comparable to those of comparator drugs in the treatment of febrile neutropenia.
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.