BACKGROUND:

Opportunistic fungal infections are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in neutropenic cancer patients and antifungal therapy are used both empirically and therapeutically in these patients.

OBJECTIVES:

To compare the benefits and harms of Voriconazole with those of amphotericin B and fluconazole when used for prevention or treatment of invasive fungal infections in cancer patients with neutropenia.

SEARCH STRATEGY:

MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library (May 2005). Letters, abstracts and unpublished trials were accepted. Contact to authors and industry.

SELECTION CRITERIA:

Randomised trials comparing voriconazole with amphotericin B or fluconazole.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:

Data on mortality, invasive fungal infection, colonisation, use of additional (escape) antifungal therapy and adverse effects leading to discontinuation of therapy were extracted by two authors independently.

MAIN RESULTS:

Two trials were included. One trial compared voriconazole to liposomal amphotericin B as empirical treatment of fever of unknown origin (suspected fungal infections) in neutropenic cancer patients (849 patients, 58 deaths). The other trial compared voriconazole to amphotericin B deoxycholate in the treatment of confirmed and presumed invasive Aspergillus infections (391 patients, 98 deaths). In the first trial, voriconazole was significantly inferior to liposomal amphotericin B according to the authors' prespecified criteria. More patients died in the voriconazole group and a claimed significant reduction in the number of breakthrough fungal infections disappeared when patients arbitrarily excluded from analysis by the authors were included. In the second trial, the deoxycholate preparation of amphotericin B was used without any indication of the use of premedication and substitution with electrolytes and salt water to avoid handicapping this drug. This choice of comparator resulted in a marked difference in the duration of treatment on trial drugs (77 days with voriconazole versus 10 days with amphotericin B), and precludes meaningful comparisons of the benefits and harms of the two drugs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:

Liposomal amphotericin B is significantly more effective than voriconazole for empirical therapy of neutropenic cancer patients and should be preferred. For treatment of aspergillosis, there are no trials that have compared voriconazole with amphotericin B given under optimal conditions.

Related Articles
Review Amphotericin B versus fluconazole for controlling fungal infections in neutropenic cancer patients.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002
Review Amphotericin B versus fluconazole for controlling fungal infections in neutropenic cancer patients.
Johansen HK, Gøtzsche PC. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2002; (2):CD000239.
Review Amphotericin B vs fluconazole for controlling fungal infections in neutropenic cancer patients.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000
Review Amphotericin B vs fluconazole for controlling fungal infections in neutropenic cancer patients.
Johansen HK, Gotzsche PC. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000; (3):CD000239.
Review Antifungal therapy in infants and children with proven, probable or suspected invasive fungal infections.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010
Review Antifungal therapy in infants and children with proven, probable or suspected invasive fungal infections.
Blyth CC, Hale K, Palasanthiran P, O'Brien T, Bennett MH. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 Feb 17; (2):CD006343. Epub 2010 Feb 17.
Review Liposomal amphotericin B: a review of its use as empirical therapy in febrile neutropenia and in the treatment of invasive fungal infections.
Drugs. 2009
Review Liposomal amphotericin B: a review of its use as empirical therapy in febrile neutropenia and in the treatment of invasive fungal infections.
Moen MD, Lyseng-Williamson KA, Scott LJ. Drugs. 2009; 69(3):361-92.
Voriconazole compared with liposomal amphotericin B for empirical antifungal therapy in patients with neutropenia and persistent fever.
N Engl J Med. 2002
Voriconazole compared with liposomal amphotericin B for empirical antifungal therapy in patients with neutropenia and persistent fever.
Walsh TJ, Pappas P, Winston DJ, Lazarus HM, Petersen F, Raffalli J, Yanovich S, Stiff P, Greenberg R, Donowitz G, et al. N Engl J Med. 2002 Jan 24; 346(4):225-34.
Role of therapeutic drug monitoring of voriconazole in the treatment of invasive fungal infections.
Can J Hosp Pharm. 2009
Role of therapeutic drug monitoring of voriconazole in the treatment of invasive fungal infections.
Kuo IF, Ensom MH. Can J Hosp Pharm. 2009 Nov; 62(6):469-82.
Multidisciplinary approach to the treatment of invasive fungal infections in adult patients. Prophylaxis, empirical, preemptive or targeted therapy, which is the best in the different hosts?
Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2008
Multidisciplinary approach to the treatment of invasive fungal infections in adult patients. Prophylaxis, empirical, preemptive or targeted therapy, which is the best in the different hosts?
Zaragoza R, Pemán J, Salavert M, Viudes A, Solé A, Jarque I, Monte E, Romá E, Cantón E. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2008 Dec; 4(6):1261-80.
A cost-effectiveness analysis of caspofungin vs. liposomal amphotericin B for treatment of suspected fungal infections in the UK.
Eur J Haematol. 2007
A cost-effectiveness analysis of caspofungin vs. liposomal amphotericin B for treatment of suspected fungal infections in the UK.
Bruynesteyn K, Gant V, McKenzie C, Pagliuca T, Poynton C, Kumar RN, Jansen JP. Eur J Haematol. 2007 Jun; 78(6):532-9. Epub 2007 Apr 5.

To top • Home

---

Show map | Diseases | Vaccination | Chronic disease | Medicine | Pregnancy | Heat & Sunburn | Cold | Security | Useful tips | Faq | News

TraveldoctorOnline 2001 • Disclaimer • webmaster