Efficacy of quinolone prophylaxis in neutropenic cancer patients: a meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To perform a meta-analysis to estimate the efficacy of quinolone antibiotics in preventing infections, fevers, and deaths among cancer patients neutropenic following chemotherapy.

METHODS: We searched MEDLINE to identify randomized trials of quinolone prophylaxis, controlled either with no prophylaxis or trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (TMS) prophylaxis. We pooled relative risks for outcomes using a random-effects model.

RESULTS: Eighteen trials with 1,408 subjects were included. Compared with no prophylaxis, quinolones significantly reduced the incidence of gram-negative bacterial infections (relative risk, 0.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.12 to 0.37), microbiologically documented infections (0.65; 0.50 to 0.85), total infections (0.54; 0.31 to 0.95), and fevers (0.85; 0.73 to 0.99). Quinolone prophylaxis did not alter the incidence of gram-positive bacterial, fungal, or clinically documented infections, or infection-related deaths. Results were similar for trials that used TMS as the control regimen. Among those who received quinolones, the incidence of infections due to quinolone-resistant organisms was 3.0% (95% CI, 1.7% to 5.2%) for gram-negative species and 9.4% (95% CI, 5.3% to 16.3%) for gram-positive species. Based on limited data, the incidence of quinolone-resistant infections was not higher among quinolone recipients than controls. With fever as outcome, blinded trials found quinolones less efficacious than did unblinded trials.

CONCLUSION: Quinolone prophylaxis substantially reduces the incidence of various infection-related outcomes, but not deaths, in these patients. Although this reduction in infections may translate into a decrease in morbidity, the reduction in fevers (and by extension, use of empiric antibiotics) appears small, and blinded trials provided less evidence for benefit than unblinded trials. Quinolone-resistant infections are uncommon, but continued vigilance is warranted.