Evaluation of the Practice of Antifungal Prophylaxis Use in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia: Results From the SEIFEM 2010-B Registry
Background. To analyze the efficacy of antifungal prophylaxis (AFP) with posaconazole and itraconazole in a real-life setting of patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) during the first induction of remission. Methods. From January 2010 to June 2011, all patients with newly diagnosed AML were con...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Clinical infectious diseases 2012-12, Vol.55 (11), p.1515-1521 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 1521 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 11 |
| container_start_page | 1515 |
| container_title | Clinical infectious diseases |
| container_volume | 55 |
| creator | Pagano, Livio Caira, Morena Candoni, Anna Aversa, Franco Castagnola, Carlo Caramatti, Cecilia Cattaneo, Chiara Delia, Mario De Paolis, Maria Rosaria Di Blasi, Roberta Di Caprio, Luigi Fanci, Rosa Garzia, Mariagrazia Martino, Bruno Melillo, Lorella Mitra, Maria Enza Nadali, Gianpaolo Nosari, Annamaria Picardi, Marco Potenza, Leonardo Salutari, Prassede Trecarichi, Enrico Maria Tumbarello, Mario Verga, Luisa Vianelli, Nicola Busca, Alessandro |
| description | Background. To analyze the efficacy of antifungal prophylaxis (AFP) with posaconazole and itraconazole in a real-life setting of patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) during the first induction of remission. Methods. From January 2010 to June 2011, all patients with newly diagnosed AML were consecutively registered and prospectively monitored at 30 Italian hematological centers. Our analysis focused on adult patients who received intensive chemotherapy and a mold-active AFP for at least 5 days. To determine the efficacy of prophylaxis, invasive fungal disease (IFD) incidence, IFD-attributable mortality, and overall survival were evaluated. Results. In total, 515 patients were included in the present analysis. Posaconazole was the most frequently prescribed drug (260 patients [50%]) followed by fluconazole (148 [29%]) and itraconazole (93 [18%]). When comparing the groups taking posaconazole and itraconazole, there were no significant differences in the baseline clinical characteristics, whereas there were significant differences in the percentage of breakthrough IFDs (18.9% with posaconazole and 38.7% with itraconazole, P |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1093/cid/cis773 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1315607405</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>41721858</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>41721858</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c436t-14cd3e97e72382bd82489f1310600d154caf8672f1c318b41d6c7180b8c6f7693</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkUtv1DAUhSNERR-wYQ-yhCqhSgHfOH6E3VBmSqUpVEDFMvI4zoynTjzYDpCfwr-thxmKxIaF5cf9zrm6Pln2FPArwBV5rUyTVuCcPMiOgBKeM1rBw3TGVOSlIOIwOw5hjTGAwPRRdlgUFaUlqY6yX9Pv0g4yGtcj16K40ujaSxWN0tv7pI-mHfqltOnZbVajlT9NQDdBI9Oj66TTfQzoq4kr9EH_sCN6Z-Syd0E3aKKGqNHVqK0zDZrr4VZ3Rr5Bn3QYbBLNvOt-N_w8vZxNr1CBAedvU3lpQvTj4-yglTboJ_v9JLuZTb-cv8_nHy8uzyfzXJWExRxK1RBdcc0LIopFI4pSVC0QwAzjBmipZCsYL1pQBMSihIYpnr5hIRRrOavISfZy57vx7tugQ6w7E5S2VvbaDaFOVpRhXmL6f7Tg275At-iLf9C1G3yfBqkBaIIEFjhRZztKeReC12298aaTfqwB19ts65Rtvcs2wc_3lsOi0809-ifMBJzuARmUtK2XfZL-5RijOE2RuGc7bh2i8_f1EngBggpyB7YqtFA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1151068080</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Evaluation of the Practice of Antifungal Prophylaxis Use in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia: Results From the SEIFEM 2010-B Registry</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Pagano, Livio ; Caira, Morena ; Candoni, Anna ; Aversa, Franco ; Castagnola, Carlo ; Caramatti, Cecilia ; Cattaneo, Chiara ; Delia, Mario ; De Paolis, Maria Rosaria ; Di Blasi, Roberta ; Di Caprio, Luigi ; Fanci, Rosa ; Garzia, Mariagrazia ; Martino, Bruno ; Melillo, Lorella ; Mitra, Maria Enza ; Nadali, Gianpaolo ; Nosari, Annamaria ; Picardi, Marco ; Potenza, Leonardo ; Salutari, Prassede ; Trecarichi, Enrico Maria ; Tumbarello, Mario ; Verga, Luisa ; Vianelli, Nicola ; Busca, Alessandro</creator><creatorcontrib>Pagano, Livio ; Caira, Morena ; Candoni, Anna ; Aversa, Franco ; Castagnola, Carlo ; Caramatti, Cecilia ; Cattaneo, Chiara ; Delia, Mario ; De Paolis, Maria Rosaria ; Di Blasi, Roberta ; Di Caprio, Luigi ; Fanci, Rosa ; Garzia, Mariagrazia ; Martino, Bruno ; Melillo, Lorella ; Mitra, Maria Enza ; Nadali, Gianpaolo ; Nosari, Annamaria ; Picardi, Marco ; Potenza, Leonardo ; Salutari, Prassede ; Trecarichi, Enrico Maria ; Tumbarello, Mario ; Verga, Luisa ; Vianelli, Nicola ; Busca, Alessandro ; SEIFEM Group ; for the SEIFEM Group</creatorcontrib><description>Background. To analyze the efficacy of antifungal prophylaxis (AFP) with posaconazole and itraconazole in a real-life setting of patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) during the first induction of remission. Methods. From January 2010 to June 2011, all patients with newly diagnosed AML were consecutively registered and prospectively monitored at 30 Italian hematological centers. Our analysis focused on adult patients who received intensive chemotherapy and a mold-active AFP for at least 5 days. To determine the efficacy of prophylaxis, invasive fungal disease (IFD) incidence, IFD-attributable mortality, and overall survival were evaluated. Results. In total, 515 patients were included in the present analysis. Posaconazole was the most frequently prescribed drug (260 patients [50%]) followed by fluconazole (148 [29%]) and itraconazole (93 [18%]). When comparing the groups taking posaconazole and itraconazole, there were no significant differences in the baseline clinical characteristics, whereas there were significant differences in the percentage of breakthrough IFDs (18.9% with posaconazole and 38.7% with itraconazole, P<.001). The same trend was observed when only proven/probable mold infections were considered (posaconazole, 2.7% vs itraconazole, 10.7%, P = .02). There were no significant differences in the IFD-associated mortality rate, while posaconazole prophylaxis had a significant impact on overall survival at day 90 (P = .002). Conclusions. During the last years, the use of posaconazole prophylaxis in high-risk patients has significantly increased. Although our study was not randomized, it demonstrates in a real-life setting that posaconazole prophylaxis confers an advantage in terms of both breakthrough IFDs and overall survival compared to itraconazole prophylaxis. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT01315925.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1058-4838</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1537-6591</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/cid/cis773</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22955439</identifier><identifier>CODEN: CIDIEL</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Acute myeloid leukemia ; Aged ; Antifungal Agents - therapeutic use ; Antifungals ; Aspergillosis ; Biological and medical sciences ; Chemotherapy ; Clinical trials ; Drug use ; Drugs ; Female ; fluconazole ; Fungal diseases ; Fungal infections ; Hematologic and hematopoietic diseases ; Hematopoietic stem cells ; Humans ; Infection ; Infections ; Infectious diseases ; Itraconazole ; Itraconazole - therapeutic use ; Leukemia ; Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute - complications ; Leukemias. Malignant lymphomas. Malignant reticulosis. Myelofibrosis ; Male ; Medical diagnosis ; Medical practice ; Medical sciences ; Middle Aged ; Molds ; Mortality ; Mycoses - complications ; Mycoses - prevention & control ; Myeloid leukemia ; Pharmacology ; Posaconazole ; Prophylaxis ; Remission ; Risk groups ; Survival ; Triazoles - therapeutic use</subject><ispartof>Clinical infectious diseases, 2012-12, Vol.55 (11), p.1515-1521</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2012 Oxford University Press on behalf of the Infectious Diseases Society of America</rights><rights>2014 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright Oxford University Press, UK Dec 1, 2012</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c436t-14cd3e97e72382bd82489f1310600d154caf8672f1c318b41d6c7180b8c6f7693</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c436t-14cd3e97e72382bd82489f1310600d154caf8672f1c318b41d6c7180b8c6f7693</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/41721858$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/41721858$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,27901,27902,57992,58225</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=26650053$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22955439$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Pagano, Livio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Caira, Morena</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Candoni, Anna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aversa, Franco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Castagnola, Carlo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Caramatti, Cecilia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cattaneo, Chiara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Delia, Mario</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Paolis, Maria Rosaria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Di Blasi, Roberta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Di Caprio, Luigi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fanci, Rosa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Garzia, Mariagrazia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martino, Bruno</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Melillo, Lorella</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mitra, Maria Enza</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nadali, Gianpaolo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nosari, Annamaria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Picardi, Marco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Potenza, Leonardo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salutari, Prassede</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Trecarichi, Enrico Maria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tumbarello, Mario</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Verga, Luisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vianelli, Nicola</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Busca, Alessandro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SEIFEM Group</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>for the SEIFEM Group</creatorcontrib><title>Evaluation of the Practice of Antifungal Prophylaxis Use in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia: Results From the SEIFEM 2010-B Registry</title><title>Clinical infectious diseases</title><addtitle>Clin Infect Dis</addtitle><description>Background. To analyze the efficacy of antifungal prophylaxis (AFP) with posaconazole and itraconazole in a real-life setting of patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) during the first induction of remission. Methods. From January 2010 to June 2011, all patients with newly diagnosed AML were consecutively registered and prospectively monitored at 30 Italian hematological centers. Our analysis focused on adult patients who received intensive chemotherapy and a mold-active AFP for at least 5 days. To determine the efficacy of prophylaxis, invasive fungal disease (IFD) incidence, IFD-attributable mortality, and overall survival were evaluated. Results. In total, 515 patients were included in the present analysis. Posaconazole was the most frequently prescribed drug (260 patients [50%]) followed by fluconazole (148 [29%]) and itraconazole (93 [18%]). When comparing the groups taking posaconazole and itraconazole, there were no significant differences in the baseline clinical characteristics, whereas there were significant differences in the percentage of breakthrough IFDs (18.9% with posaconazole and 38.7% with itraconazole, P<.001). The same trend was observed when only proven/probable mold infections were considered (posaconazole, 2.7% vs itraconazole, 10.7%, P = .02). There were no significant differences in the IFD-associated mortality rate, while posaconazole prophylaxis had a significant impact on overall survival at day 90 (P = .002). Conclusions. During the last years, the use of posaconazole prophylaxis in high-risk patients has significantly increased. Although our study was not randomized, it demonstrates in a real-life setting that posaconazole prophylaxis confers an advantage in terms of both breakthrough IFDs and overall survival compared to itraconazole prophylaxis. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT01315925.</description><subject>Acute myeloid leukemia</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Antifungal Agents - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Antifungals</subject><subject>Aspergillosis</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Chemotherapy</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Drug use</subject><subject>Drugs</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>fluconazole</subject><subject>Fungal diseases</subject><subject>Fungal infections</subject><subject>Hematologic and hematopoietic diseases</subject><subject>Hematopoietic stem cells</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Infection</subject><subject>Infections</subject><subject>Infectious diseases</subject><subject>Itraconazole</subject><subject>Itraconazole - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Leukemia</subject><subject>Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute - complications</subject><subject>Leukemias. Malignant lymphomas. Malignant reticulosis. Myelofibrosis</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical diagnosis</subject><subject>Medical practice</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Molds</subject><subject>Mortality</subject><subject>Mycoses - complications</subject><subject>Mycoses - prevention & control</subject><subject>Myeloid leukemia</subject><subject>Pharmacology</subject><subject>Posaconazole</subject><subject>Prophylaxis</subject><subject>Remission</subject><subject>Risk groups</subject><subject>Survival</subject><subject>Triazoles - therapeutic use</subject><issn>1058-4838</issn><issn>1537-6591</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkUtv1DAUhSNERR-wYQ-yhCqhSgHfOH6E3VBmSqUpVEDFMvI4zoynTjzYDpCfwr-thxmKxIaF5cf9zrm6Pln2FPArwBV5rUyTVuCcPMiOgBKeM1rBw3TGVOSlIOIwOw5hjTGAwPRRdlgUFaUlqY6yX9Pv0g4yGtcj16K40ujaSxWN0tv7pI-mHfqltOnZbVajlT9NQDdBI9Oj66TTfQzoq4kr9EH_sCN6Z-Syd0E3aKKGqNHVqK0zDZrr4VZ3Rr5Bn3QYbBLNvOt-N_w8vZxNr1CBAedvU3lpQvTj4-yglTboJ_v9JLuZTb-cv8_nHy8uzyfzXJWExRxK1RBdcc0LIopFI4pSVC0QwAzjBmipZCsYL1pQBMSihIYpnr5hIRRrOavISfZy57vx7tugQ6w7E5S2VvbaDaFOVpRhXmL6f7Tg275At-iLf9C1G3yfBqkBaIIEFjhRZztKeReC12298aaTfqwB19ts65Rtvcs2wc_3lsOi0809-ifMBJzuARmUtK2XfZL-5RijOE2RuGc7bh2i8_f1EngBggpyB7YqtFA</recordid><startdate>20121201</startdate><enddate>20121201</enddate><creator>Pagano, Livio</creator><creator>Caira, Morena</creator><creator>Candoni, Anna</creator><creator>Aversa, Franco</creator><creator>Castagnola, Carlo</creator><creator>Caramatti, Cecilia</creator><creator>Cattaneo, Chiara</creator><creator>Delia, Mario</creator><creator>De Paolis, Maria Rosaria</creator><creator>Di Blasi, Roberta</creator><creator>Di Caprio, Luigi</creator><creator>Fanci, Rosa</creator><creator>Garzia, Mariagrazia</creator><creator>Martino, Bruno</creator><creator>Melillo, Lorella</creator><creator>Mitra, Maria Enza</creator><creator>Nadali, Gianpaolo</creator><creator>Nosari, Annamaria</creator><creator>Picardi, Marco</creator><creator>Potenza, Leonardo</creator><creator>Salutari, Prassede</creator><creator>Trecarichi, Enrico Maria</creator><creator>Tumbarello, Mario</creator><creator>Verga, Luisa</creator><creator>Vianelli, Nicola</creator><creator>Busca, Alessandro</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7T2</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20121201</creationdate><title>Evaluation of the Practice of Antifungal Prophylaxis Use in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia: Results From the SEIFEM 2010-B Registry</title><author>Pagano, Livio ; Caira, Morena ; Candoni, Anna ; Aversa, Franco ; Castagnola, Carlo ; Caramatti, Cecilia ; Cattaneo, Chiara ; Delia, Mario ; De Paolis, Maria Rosaria ; Di Blasi, Roberta ; Di Caprio, Luigi ; Fanci, Rosa ; Garzia, Mariagrazia ; Martino, Bruno ; Melillo, Lorella ; Mitra, Maria Enza ; Nadali, Gianpaolo ; Nosari, Annamaria ; Picardi, Marco ; Potenza, Leonardo ; Salutari, Prassede ; Trecarichi, Enrico Maria ; Tumbarello, Mario ; Verga, Luisa ; Vianelli, Nicola ; Busca, Alessandro</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c436t-14cd3e97e72382bd82489f1310600d154caf8672f1c318b41d6c7180b8c6f7693</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Acute myeloid leukemia</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Antifungal Agents - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Antifungals</topic><topic>Aspergillosis</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Chemotherapy</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Drug use</topic><topic>Drugs</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>fluconazole</topic><topic>Fungal diseases</topic><topic>Fungal infections</topic><topic>Hematologic and hematopoietic diseases</topic><topic>Hematopoietic stem cells</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Infection</topic><topic>Infections</topic><topic>Infectious diseases</topic><topic>Itraconazole</topic><topic>Itraconazole - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Leukemia</topic><topic>Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute - complications</topic><topic>Leukemias. Malignant lymphomas. Malignant reticulosis. Myelofibrosis</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical diagnosis</topic><topic>Medical practice</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Molds</topic><topic>Mortality</topic><topic>Mycoses - complications</topic><topic>Mycoses - prevention & control</topic><topic>Myeloid leukemia</topic><topic>Pharmacology</topic><topic>Posaconazole</topic><topic>Prophylaxis</topic><topic>Remission</topic><topic>Risk groups</topic><topic>Survival</topic><topic>Triazoles - therapeutic use</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Pagano, Livio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Caira, Morena</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Candoni, Anna</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Aversa, Franco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Castagnola, Carlo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Caramatti, Cecilia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cattaneo, Chiara</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Delia, Mario</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Paolis, Maria Rosaria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Di Blasi, Roberta</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Di Caprio, Luigi</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fanci, Rosa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Garzia, Mariagrazia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martino, Bruno</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Melillo, Lorella</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mitra, Maria Enza</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nadali, Gianpaolo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nosari, Annamaria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Picardi, Marco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Potenza, Leonardo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salutari, Prassede</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Trecarichi, Enrico Maria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tumbarello, Mario</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Verga, Luisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vianelli, Nicola</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Busca, Alessandro</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SEIFEM Group</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>for the SEIFEM Group</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Health and Safety Science Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Clinical infectious diseases</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Pagano, Livio</au><au>Caira, Morena</au><au>Candoni, Anna</au><au>Aversa, Franco</au><au>Castagnola, Carlo</au><au>Caramatti, Cecilia</au><au>Cattaneo, Chiara</au><au>Delia, Mario</au><au>De Paolis, Maria Rosaria</au><au>Di Blasi, Roberta</au><au>Di Caprio, Luigi</au><au>Fanci, Rosa</au><au>Garzia, Mariagrazia</au><au>Martino, Bruno</au><au>Melillo, Lorella</au><au>Mitra, Maria Enza</au><au>Nadali, Gianpaolo</au><au>Nosari, Annamaria</au><au>Picardi, Marco</au><au>Potenza, Leonardo</au><au>Salutari, Prassede</au><au>Trecarichi, Enrico Maria</au><au>Tumbarello, Mario</au><au>Verga, Luisa</au><au>Vianelli, Nicola</au><au>Busca, Alessandro</au><aucorp>SEIFEM Group</aucorp><aucorp>for the SEIFEM Group</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Evaluation of the Practice of Antifungal Prophylaxis Use in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia: Results From the SEIFEM 2010-B Registry</atitle><jtitle>Clinical infectious diseases</jtitle><addtitle>Clin Infect Dis</addtitle><date>2012-12-01</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>55</volume><issue>11</issue><spage>1515</spage><epage>1521</epage><pages>1515-1521</pages><issn>1058-4838</issn><eissn>1537-6591</eissn><coden>CIDIEL</coden><abstract>Background. To analyze the efficacy of antifungal prophylaxis (AFP) with posaconazole and itraconazole in a real-life setting of patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) during the first induction of remission. Methods. From January 2010 to June 2011, all patients with newly diagnosed AML were consecutively registered and prospectively monitored at 30 Italian hematological centers. Our analysis focused on adult patients who received intensive chemotherapy and a mold-active AFP for at least 5 days. To determine the efficacy of prophylaxis, invasive fungal disease (IFD) incidence, IFD-attributable mortality, and overall survival were evaluated. Results. In total, 515 patients were included in the present analysis. Posaconazole was the most frequently prescribed drug (260 patients [50%]) followed by fluconazole (148 [29%]) and itraconazole (93 [18%]). When comparing the groups taking posaconazole and itraconazole, there were no significant differences in the baseline clinical characteristics, whereas there were significant differences in the percentage of breakthrough IFDs (18.9% with posaconazole and 38.7% with itraconazole, P<.001). The same trend was observed when only proven/probable mold infections were considered (posaconazole, 2.7% vs itraconazole, 10.7%, P = .02). There were no significant differences in the IFD-associated mortality rate, while posaconazole prophylaxis had a significant impact on overall survival at day 90 (P = .002). Conclusions. During the last years, the use of posaconazole prophylaxis in high-risk patients has significantly increased. Although our study was not randomized, it demonstrates in a real-life setting that posaconazole prophylaxis confers an advantage in terms of both breakthrough IFDs and overall survival compared to itraconazole prophylaxis. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT01315925.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><pmid>22955439</pmid><doi>10.1093/cid/cis773</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1058-4838 |
| ispartof | Clinical infectious diseases, 2012-12, Vol.55 (11), p.1515-1521 |
| issn | 1058-4838 1537-6591 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1315607405 |
| source | Jstor Complete Legacy; Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); MEDLINE; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
| subjects | Acute myeloid leukemia Aged Antifungal Agents - therapeutic use Antifungals Aspergillosis Biological and medical sciences Chemotherapy Clinical trials Drug use Drugs Female fluconazole Fungal diseases Fungal infections Hematologic and hematopoietic diseases Hematopoietic stem cells Humans Infection Infections Infectious diseases Itraconazole Itraconazole - therapeutic use Leukemia Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute - complications Leukemias. Malignant lymphomas. Malignant reticulosis. Myelofibrosis Male Medical diagnosis Medical practice Medical sciences Middle Aged Molds Mortality Mycoses - complications Mycoses - prevention & control Myeloid leukemia Pharmacology Posaconazole Prophylaxis Remission Risk groups Survival Triazoles - therapeutic use |
| title | Evaluation of the Practice of Antifungal Prophylaxis Use in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia: Results From the SEIFEM 2010-B Registry |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-30T16%3A24%3A24IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evaluation%20of%20the%20Practice%20of%20Antifungal%20Prophylaxis%20Use%20in%20Patients%20With%20Newly%20Diagnosed%20Acute%20Myeloid%20Leukemia:%20Results%20From%20the%20SEIFEM%202010-B%20Registry&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20infectious%20diseases&rft.au=Pagano,%20Livio&rft.aucorp=SEIFEM%20Group&rft.date=2012-12-01&rft.volume=55&rft.issue=11&rft.spage=1515&rft.epage=1521&rft.pages=1515-1521&rft.issn=1058-4838&rft.eissn=1537-6591&rft.coden=CIDIEL&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/cid/cis773&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E41721858%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1151068080&rft_id=info:pmid/22955439&rft_jstor_id=41721858&rfr_iscdi=true |