TY - JOUR
T1 - Exploring failure of antimicrobial prophylaxis and pre-emptive therapy for transplant recipients
T2 - a systematic review
AU - Märtson, Anne-Grete
AU - Bakker, Martijn
AU - Blokzijl, Hans
AU - Verschuuren, Erik A M
AU - Berger, Stefan P
AU - Span, Lambert F R
AU - van der Werf, Tjip S
AU - Alffenaar, Jan-Willem C
N1 - © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ.
PY - 2020/1/7
Y1 - 2020/1/7
N2 - Objectives Infections remain a threat for solid organ and stem cell transplant recipients. Antimicrobial prophylaxis and pre-emptive therapy have improved survival of these patients; however, the failure rates of prophylaxis are not negligible. The aim of this systematic review is to explore the reasons behind failure of antimicrobial prophylaxis and pre-emptive therapy. Setting This systematic review included prospective randomised controlled trials and prospective single-arm studies. Participants The studies included were on prophylaxis and pre-emptive therapy of opportunistic infections in transplant recipients. Studies were included from databases MEDLINE, CENTRAL and Embase published until October first 2018. Primary and secondary outcome measures Primary outcome measures were breakthrough infections, adverse events leading to stopping of treatment, switching medication or dose reduction. Secondary outcome measures were acquired resistance to antimicrobials, antifungals or antivirals and death. Results From 3317 identified records, 30 records from 24 studies with 2851 patients were included in the systematic review. Seventeen focused on prophylactic and pre-emptive treatment of cytomegalovirus and seven studies on invasive fungal infection. The main reasons for failure of prophylaxis and pre-emptive therapy were adverse events and breakthrough infections, which were described in 54% (13 studies) and 38% (9 studies) of the included studies, respectively. In 25%, six of the studies, a detailed description of patients who experienced failure of prophylaxis or pre-emptive therapy was unclear or lacking. Conclusions Our results show that although failure is reported in the studies, the level of detail prohibits a detailed analysis of failure of prophylaxis and pre-emptive therapy. Clearly reporting on patients with a negative outcome should be improved. We have provided guidance on how to detect failure early in a clinical setting in accordance to the results from this systematic review.
AB - Objectives Infections remain a threat for solid organ and stem cell transplant recipients. Antimicrobial prophylaxis and pre-emptive therapy have improved survival of these patients; however, the failure rates of prophylaxis are not negligible. The aim of this systematic review is to explore the reasons behind failure of antimicrobial prophylaxis and pre-emptive therapy. Setting This systematic review included prospective randomised controlled trials and prospective single-arm studies. Participants The studies included were on prophylaxis and pre-emptive therapy of opportunistic infections in transplant recipients. Studies were included from databases MEDLINE, CENTRAL and Embase published until October first 2018. Primary and secondary outcome measures Primary outcome measures were breakthrough infections, adverse events leading to stopping of treatment, switching medication or dose reduction. Secondary outcome measures were acquired resistance to antimicrobials, antifungals or antivirals and death. Results From 3317 identified records, 30 records from 24 studies with 2851 patients were included in the systematic review. Seventeen focused on prophylactic and pre-emptive treatment of cytomegalovirus and seven studies on invasive fungal infection. The main reasons for failure of prophylaxis and pre-emptive therapy were adverse events and breakthrough infections, which were described in 54% (13 studies) and 38% (9 studies) of the included studies, respectively. In 25%, six of the studies, a detailed description of patients who experienced failure of prophylaxis or pre-emptive therapy was unclear or lacking. Conclusions Our results show that although failure is reported in the studies, the level of detail prohibits a detailed analysis of failure of prophylaxis and pre-emptive therapy. Clearly reporting on patients with a negative outcome should be improved. We have provided guidance on how to detect failure early in a clinical setting in accordance to the results from this systematic review.
KW - transplant medicine
KW - infectious diseases
KW - infection control
KW - INVASIVE FUNGAL-INFECTIONS
KW - STEM-CELL TRANSPLANT
KW - EXTENDED VALGANCICLOVIR PROPHYLAXIS
KW - CYTOMEGALOVIRUS-INFECTION
KW - HIGH-RISK
KW - RANDOMIZED-TRIAL
KW - POPULATION PHARMACOKINETICS
KW - VALACYCLOVIR PROPHYLAXIS
KW - HEMATOLOGICAL PATIENTS
KW - LIVER-TRANSPLANTATION
U2 - 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034940
DO - 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034940
M3 - Article
C2 - 31915177
VL - 10
JO - BMJ Open
JF - BMJ Open
SN - 2044-6055
IS - 1
M1 - e034940
ER -