中性粒细胞减少症患者预防性诺氟沙星耐受性分析。

M L Corrado, W E Struble, M Hesney
{"title":"中性粒细胞减少症患者预防性诺氟沙星耐受性分析。","authors":"M L Corrado,&nbsp;W E Struble,&nbsp;M Hesney","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Norfloxacin has been compared to placebo (136 patients), sulfamethoxazole plus trimethoprim (SXT, 72 patients) and oral vancomycin plus colistin (V/C, 61 patients) for the prevention of alimentary tract-associated infections during and after induction chemotherapy. These patients were evaluated for the safety and tolerability of each regimen by clinical and laboratory means. Most neutropenics involved, regardless of the regimen, experienced at least one adverse experience. The majority were felt to be unrelated to prophylactic study drug therapy. Of 139 patients who received norfloxacin, only two had drug-related adverse experiences, compared to two of 35 receiving SXT, five of 28 for VC, and none of 67 receiving placebo. In evaluating adverse experiences considered possibly drug related, 19 occurred on norfloxacin compared to 13 for placebo. Among neurologic adverse experiences, only one possibly related to norfloxacin occurred (confusion), while three occurred on placebo (confusion, decreased auditory acuity and hallucinations). Generally, no significant differences were seen between any of the regimens except for a higher frequency of diarrhea in those receiving V/C.</p>","PeriodicalId":11941,"journal":{"name":"European journal of cancer & clinical oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1988-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The tolerability profile of prophylactic norfloxacin in neutropenic patients.\",\"authors\":\"M L Corrado,&nbsp;W E Struble,&nbsp;M Hesney\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Norfloxacin has been compared to placebo (136 patients), sulfamethoxazole plus trimethoprim (SXT, 72 patients) and oral vancomycin plus colistin (V/C, 61 patients) for the prevention of alimentary tract-associated infections during and after induction chemotherapy. These patients were evaluated for the safety and tolerability of each regimen by clinical and laboratory means. Most neutropenics involved, regardless of the regimen, experienced at least one adverse experience. The majority were felt to be unrelated to prophylactic study drug therapy. Of 139 patients who received norfloxacin, only two had drug-related adverse experiences, compared to two of 35 receiving SXT, five of 28 for VC, and none of 67 receiving placebo. In evaluating adverse experiences considered possibly drug related, 19 occurred on norfloxacin compared to 13 for placebo. Among neurologic adverse experiences, only one possibly related to norfloxacin occurred (confusion), while three occurred on placebo (confusion, decreased auditory acuity and hallucinations). Generally, no significant differences were seen between any of the regimens except for a higher frequency of diarrhea in those receiving V/C.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11941,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European journal of cancer & clinical oncology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1988-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European journal of cancer & clinical oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal of cancer & clinical oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

诺氟沙星与安慰剂(136例)、磺胺甲恶唑加甲氧苄啶(72例)和口服万古霉素加粘菌素(61例)在诱导化疗期间和化疗后预防消化道相关感染的效果进行了比较。这些患者通过临床和实验室手段评估每个方案的安全性和耐受性。大多数中性粒细胞减少症患者,无论采用何种治疗方案,都至少经历过一次不良经历。大多数被认为与预防性学习药物治疗无关。在接受诺氟沙星治疗的139例患者中,只有2例出现药物相关不良反应,而35例接受SXT治疗的患者中有2例,28例接受VC治疗的患者中有5例,67例接受安慰剂治疗的患者中没有发生不良反应。在评估可能与药物相关的不良反应时,诺氟沙星组有19例,安慰剂组有13例。在神经系统不良反应中,只有一种可能与诺氟沙星有关(精神错乱),而安慰剂组有三种(精神错乱、听觉灵敏度下降和幻觉)。总的来说,除了接受V/C治疗的患者腹泻频率较高外,两种治疗方案之间没有显著差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The tolerability profile of prophylactic norfloxacin in neutropenic patients.

Norfloxacin has been compared to placebo (136 patients), sulfamethoxazole plus trimethoprim (SXT, 72 patients) and oral vancomycin plus colistin (V/C, 61 patients) for the prevention of alimentary tract-associated infections during and after induction chemotherapy. These patients were evaluated for the safety and tolerability of each regimen by clinical and laboratory means. Most neutropenics involved, regardless of the regimen, experienced at least one adverse experience. The majority were felt to be unrelated to prophylactic study drug therapy. Of 139 patients who received norfloxacin, only two had drug-related adverse experiences, compared to two of 35 receiving SXT, five of 28 for VC, and none of 67 receiving placebo. In evaluating adverse experiences considered possibly drug related, 19 occurred on norfloxacin compared to 13 for placebo. Among neurologic adverse experiences, only one possibly related to norfloxacin occurred (confusion), while three occurred on placebo (confusion, decreased auditory acuity and hallucinations). Generally, no significant differences were seen between any of the regimens except for a higher frequency of diarrhea in those receiving V/C.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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