ArticleBritish journal of haematology2026
Prevention and management of febrile neutropenia in acute myeloid leukaemia and higher risk myelodysplastic syndrome: An international survey of current practice.
Article in British journal of haematology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Febrile neutropenia causes substantial morbidity in acute myeloid leukaemia and higher risk myelodysplastic syndrome. We aimed to describe current practice and priorities for clinical trials in the prevention and management of febrile neutropenia across Australia/New Zealand (ANZ), the United Kingdom (UK), Canada and Europe. We performed an international survey of haematologists recruited via professional networks. Eighty-five unique hospitals were represented (ANZ = 20; Canada = 14; UK = 30; Europe = 21). Antibacterial prophylaxis was more commonly prescribed in Canada (79%) and the UK (83%) than in ANZ (30%) and Europe (48%, p < 0.001), and was prescribed more frequently to outpatients than inpatients. The most common empiric treatment was piperacillin-tazobactam monotherapy (66/84, 79%), with nurse-initiated antibiotic orders used in 35/84 (42%). Screening for multidrug-resistant organisms varied and was not usually used to direct antibiotic treatment. Antibiotic de-escalation was attempted in most institutions; for uncomplicated short-lived fever of unknown source, 39/85 (46%) reported ceasing antibiotics at 72 h and 68/85 (80%) within 7 days. For patients with bacteraemia, de-escalation strategies included narrowing spectrum, oral switch and cessation after defined duration. Most respondents (79/85, 93%) reported interest in recruiting for clinical trials. Clinical trials addressing practice variability in febrile neutropenia are needed, and are supported by haematologists.
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.