Intravenous-oral itraconazole versus oral posaconazole in preventing invasive fungal diseases for acute leukemia patients.

IF 1.5 Q3 HEMATOLOGY
Li Liu, Xiaolei Pei, Runzhi Ma, Yi He, Rongli Zhang, Jialin Wei, Qiaoling Ma, Weihua Zhai, Aiming Pang, Erlie Jiang, Mingzhe Han, Donglin Yang, Sizhou Feng
{"title":"Intravenous-oral itraconazole versus oral posaconazole in preventing invasive fungal diseases for acute leukemia patients.","authors":"Li Liu,&nbsp;Xiaolei Pei,&nbsp;Runzhi Ma,&nbsp;Yi He,&nbsp;Rongli Zhang,&nbsp;Jialin Wei,&nbsp;Qiaoling Ma,&nbsp;Weihua Zhai,&nbsp;Aiming Pang,&nbsp;Erlie Jiang,&nbsp;Mingzhe Han,&nbsp;Donglin Yang,&nbsp;Sizhou Feng","doi":"10.1097/BS9.0000000000000155","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Invasive fungal diseases (IFDs) are major and lethal infectious complications for patients with neutropenia after chemotherapy. Prophylaxis with intravenous and oral suspended itraconazole (200 mg Q12h intravenously × 2 days followed by 5 mg/kg·d orally in twice) or oral suspension of posaconazole (200 mg Q8h) was administered for preventing IFDs. The only 2 episodes of proven IFDs were not included after propensity-score matching (PSM), while the incidence of possible IFDs was 8.2% (9/110) in itraconazole group and 1.8% (2/110) in posaconazole group, respectively (<i>P</i> = .030). In clinical failure analysis, the failure rate of posaconazole group was lower as compared to the itraconazole group (2.7% vs 10.9%, <i>P</i> = .016). Both intravenous-oral itraconazole and posaconazole suspension are effective in preventing IFDs, while posaconazole suspension seems more tolerable.</p>","PeriodicalId":67343,"journal":{"name":"血液科学(英文)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10205377/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"血液科学(英文)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/BS9.0000000000000155","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Invasive fungal diseases (IFDs) are major and lethal infectious complications for patients with neutropenia after chemotherapy. Prophylaxis with intravenous and oral suspended itraconazole (200 mg Q12h intravenously × 2 days followed by 5 mg/kg·d orally in twice) or oral suspension of posaconazole (200 mg Q8h) was administered for preventing IFDs. The only 2 episodes of proven IFDs were not included after propensity-score matching (PSM), while the incidence of possible IFDs was 8.2% (9/110) in itraconazole group and 1.8% (2/110) in posaconazole group, respectively (P = .030). In clinical failure analysis, the failure rate of posaconazole group was lower as compared to the itraconazole group (2.7% vs 10.9%, P = .016). Both intravenous-oral itraconazole and posaconazole suspension are effective in preventing IFDs, while posaconazole suspension seems more tolerable.

Abstract Image

静脉-口服伊曲康唑与口服泊沙康唑预防急性白血病侵袭性真菌疾病的比较。
侵袭性真菌病(IFDs)是中性粒细胞减少患者化疗后主要的致死性感染性并发症。预防方法:静脉滴注和口服伊曲康唑悬浮液(200 mg Q12h静脉滴注× 2天,随后5 mg/kg·d口服2次)或泊沙康唑口服悬浮液(200 mg Q8h)。经倾向评分匹配(PSM)后,仅有2例确诊IFDs未被纳入,而伊曲康唑组和泊沙康唑组的可能IFDs发生率分别为8.2%(9/110)和1.8% (2/110)(P = 0.030)。在临床失败分析中,泊沙康唑组的失败率低于伊曲康唑组(2.7% vs 10.9%, P = 0.016)。静脉-口服伊曲康唑和泊沙康唑混悬液均可有效预防ifd,泊沙康唑混悬液的耐受性更强。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信