2010 update of EORTC guidelines for the use of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor to reduce the incidence of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in adult patients with lymphoproliferative disorders and solid tumours

Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia is a major risk factor for infection-related morbidity and mortality and also a significant dose-limiting toxicity in cancer treatment. Patients developing severe (grade 3/4) or febrile neutropenia (FN) during chemotherapy frequently receive dose reductions and/or delays to their chemotherapy. This may impact the success of treatment, particularly when treatment intent is either curative or to prolong survival. In Europe, prophylactic treatment with granulocyte-colony stimulating factors (G-CSFs), such as filgrastim (including approved biosimilars), lenograstim or pegfilgrastim is available to reduce the risk of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia. However, the use of G-CSF prophylactic treatment varies widely in clinical practice, both in the timing of therapy and in the patients to whom it is offered. The need for generally applicable, European-focused guidelines led to the formation of a European Guidelines Working Party by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) and the publication in 2006 of guidelines for the use of G-CSF in adult cancer patients at risk of chemotherapy-induced FN. A new systematic literature review has been undertaken to ensure that recommendations are current and provide guidance on clinical practice in Europe. We recommend that patient-related adverse risk factors, such as elderly age (≥65 years) and neutrophil count be evaluated in the overall assessment of FN risk before administering each cycle of chemotherapy. It is important that after a previous episode of FN, patients receive prophylactic administration of G-CSF in subsequent cycles. We provide an expanded list of common chemotherapy regimens considered to have a high (≥20%) or intermediate (10-20%) risk of FN. Prophylactic G-CSF continues to be recommended in patients receiving a chemotherapy regimen with high risk of FN. When using a chemotherapy regimen associated with FN in 10-20% of patients, particular attention should be given to patient-related risk factors that may increase the overall risk of FN. In situations where dose-dense or dose-intense chemotherapy strategies have survival benefits, prophylactic G-CSF support is recommended. Similarly, if reductions in chemotherapy dose intensity or density are known to be associated with a poor prognosis, primary G-CSF prophylaxis may be used to maintain chemotherapy. Clinical evidence shows that filgrastim, lenograstim and pegfilgrastim have clinical efficacy and we recommend the use of any of these agents to prevent FN and FN-related complications where indicated. Filgrastim biosimilars are also approved for use in Europe. While other forms of G-CSF, including biosimilars, are administered by a course of daily injections, pegfilgrastim allows once-per-cycle administration. Choice of formulation remains a matter for individual clinical judgement. Evidence from multiple low level studies derived from audit data and clinical practice suggests that some patients receive suboptimal daily G-CSFs; the use of pegfilgrastim may avoid this problem.

Health-related quality of life anticipated with different management strategies for febrile neutropenia in adult cancer patients

PURPOSE: To describe anticipated health-related quality of life (HRQL) for different hypothetical strategies of febrile neutropenia (FN) management in adult cancer patients. METHODS: Seventy-eight adult cancer patients were enrolled. Our study considered four different hypothetical treatment strategies for FN: (1) entire inpatient management with intravenous (IV) antibiotics; (2) oral treatment at home after an initial observation in hospital with IV antibiotics; (3) entire outpatient management with IV antibiotics; and (4) entire outpatient management with oral antibiotics. Initially, patients were asked to rank the different treatment strategies for FN based on their personal preference. Subsequently, HRQL was rated using visual analog scale (VAS), time trade-off (TTO), and willingness-to-pay (WTP). RESULTS: Seventy-five percent of all respondents preferred an outpatient strategy for FN (36% oral, 21% intravenous, 18% early discharge). Further, outpatient strategies were associated with higher mean VAS scores (possible range 0-10) (oral: 6.1 (standard deviation (SD) 3.1); intravenous: 6.2 (SD 2.2); early discharge: 5.7 (SD 2.1)) as compared to inpatient care (5.3 (SD 2.9)). On the aggregate level, patients were willing to give up between 9 and 10 weeks of their life (TTO; corresponding to <1% of remaining life expectancy) and to pay between $255 and $327 Canadian dollars (WTP) to avoid treatment in hospital. CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates that the majority of adult cancer patients would prefer an outpatient strategy for FN. However, patients' preferences vary substantially at the individual level. Implementation of outpatient strategies into routine clinical practice should consider this variability.

Primary prophylactic colony-stimulating factors for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in breast cancer patients

High-dose or dose-intensive cytotoxic chemotherapy often causes myelosuppression and severe neutropenia among cancer patients. Severe neutropenia accompanied by fever, named febrile neutropenia (FN), is the most serious manifestation of neutropenia usually requiring hospitalization and intravenous antibiotics. FN and neutropenia can lead to chemotherapy treatment delays or dose reductions, which potentially compromises the effectiveness of cancer treatment and prospects for a cure. Granulocyte-macrophage (GM) and granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) are administered during chemotherapy in order to prevent or reduce the incidence or the duration of FN and neutropenia.

Advances in management of low-risk febrile neutropenia

To describe and discuss the most recent advances in the management of low-risk febrile neutropenia in children with cancer.

Bacteria causing bacteremia in pediatric cancer patients presenting with febrile neutropenia – species distribution and susceptibility patterns

PURPOSE Infections are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in pediatric cancer patients. The aim of this study was to establish the microbiological spectrum and the susceptibility patterns of bacteremia-causing bacteria in pediatric cancer patients with febrile neutropenia in relation to the use of prophylactic and empirical antibiotics. METHODS We analyzed positive blood cultures of pediatric cancer patients presenting with febrile neutropenia between 2004 and 2011 in Groningen and Amsterdam (the Netherlands) and in Bern (Switzerland), using different antibiotic prophylactic and empirical regimens. RESULTS A total of 156 patients with 202 bacteremias, due to 248 bacteria species, were enrolled. The majority (73%) of bacteremias were caused by Gram-positive bacteria. Gram-negative bacteria, especially Pseudomonas aeruginosa, were observed significantly more often in Bern, where no fluoroquinolone prophylaxis was used. Ciprofloxacin-resistant bacteria were cultured more often from patients who did receive ciprofloxacin prophylaxis, compared to the patients who did not (57 versus 11%, p = 0.044). CONCLUSIONS Gram-positive bacteria predominated in this study. We showed that the use of prophylactic antibiotics in pediatric cancer patients was associated with increased resistance rates, which needs further study. The strategy for empiric antimicrobial therapy for febrile neutropenia should be adapted to local antibiotic resistance patterns.

Performance of Interleukin-6 and Interleukin-8 serum levels in pediatric oncology patients with neutropenia and fever for the assessment of low-risk

BACKGROUND: Patients with chemotherapy-related neutropenia and fever are usually hospitalized and treated on empirical intravenous broad-spectrum antibiotic regimens. Early diagnosis of sepsis in children with febrile neutropenia remains difficult due to non-specific clinical and laboratory signs of infection. We aimed to analyze whether IL-6 and IL-8 could define a group of patients at low risk of septicemia. METHODS: A prospective study was performed to assess the potential value of IL-6, IL-8 and C-reactive protein serum levels to predict severe bacterial infection or bacteremia in febrile neutropenic children with cancer during chemotherapy. Statistical test used: Friedman test, Wilcoxon-Test, Kruskal-Wallis H test, Mann-Whitney U-Test and Receiver Operating Characteristics. RESULTS: The analysis of cytokine levels measured at the onset of fever indicated that IL-6 and IL-8 are useful to define a possible group of patients with low risk of sepsis. In predicting bacteremia or severe bacterial infection, IL-6 was the best predictor with the optimum IL-6 cut-off level of 42 pg/ml showing a high sensitivity (90%) and specificity (85%). CONCLUSION: These findings may have clinical implications for risk-based antimicrobial treatment strategies.

Azacytidine for acute myeloid leukemia in elderly or frail patients: A phase II trial (SAKK 30/07)

Abstract This phase II trial treated elderly or frail AML patients with single agent subcutaneous azacytidine at 100 mg/m(2), on 5 of 28 days for up to 6 cycles. Treatment was stopped for lack of response, or continued to progression in responders. Primary endpoint was response within 6 months. A response rate >34% was considered a positive trial outcome. From 9/2008-4/2010, 45 patients from 10 centres (median age 74 (55-86) years) were accrued. Patients received 4 (1-21) cycles. Best response was CR/CRi in 8 (18%; 95% CI: 8%-32%.), 0 (0%) PR, 7 (16%) hematologic improvement, 17 (38%) stable disease. Three nonresponding patients stopped treatment after 6 cycles, 31 patients had stopped early and 11 patients continued treatment for 8-21 cycles. Adverse events (grade >III) were infections (13), febrile neutropenia (14), thrombocytopenia (7), dyspnea (6), bleeding (5) and anemia (4 patients). Median overall survival was 6 months. Peripheral blood blast counts, grouped at 30% had a borderline significant association with response (p = 0.07). This modified azacytidine schedule is feasible for elderly or frail AML patients in an outpatient setting with moderate, mainly hematologic, toxicity and response in a proportion of patients, although the primary objective was not reached.

Antibacterial and antiinflammatory kinetics of curcumin as a potential antimucositis agent in cancer patients

The antiinflammatory agent curcumin (diferuloylmethane) has a potential to mitigate cancer therapy-induced mucositis. We assessed the in vitro extent of its bactericidal activity and determined the kinetics of its antiinflammatory effect on pharyngeal cells. Bactericidal activity was assessed using the LIVE/DEAD® Kit after 4 h of exposure to curcumin (50-200 μM) in 18 oropharyngeal species commonly associated with bacteremia in febrile neutropenia. Moraxella catarrhalis or its outer membrane vesicles were used to determine the inhibitory effect of curcumin on bacteria-induced proinflammatory activity as determined by cytokine release into the supernatant of Detroit 562 pharyngeal cells using the Luminex® xMAP® technology. Curcumin exerted a concentration-dependent bactericidal effect on all 18 species tested. After 4 h at 200 μM, 12 species tested were completely killed. Preincubation of Detroit cells with 200 μM curcumin for 5 to 60 min resulted in complete suppression of the release of tumor necrosis factor-α, interleukin (IL)-6, IL-8, monocyte chemoattractant protein 1, granulocyte macrophage-colony stimulating factor, and vascular endothelial growth factor. Fibroblast growth factor-2 and interferon-γ were not affected. Repetitive exposure to curcumin resulted in repetitive suppression of cytokine/chemokine expression lasting from 4 to 6 h. Through reduction of oral microbial density as well as suppression of inflammation cascades curcumin may prevent cancer therapy-induced oral mucositis, e.g., when applied as multiple daily mouth washes.

Treatment of intestinal and hepatic mucormycosis in an immunocompromized child

During ALL chemotherapy, a 4-year-old patient presented with febrile neutropenia and abdominal pain. Ultrasound examinations were repeatedly normal. Computerized tomography on day 7 demonstrated appendicitis and multiple hepatic foci identified as mucormycosis (Absidia corymbifera). Successful outcome was achieved by aggressive re-surgery, long-term antifungal therapy with serum level-monitored posaconazole, and recovery of neutrophil counts. Considering the interference of posaconazole with CYP3A4, vincristine was administered during 72 hr posaconazole windows. Pediatric intestinal mucormycosis, still associated with a >70% case-fatality rate, calls for early imaging and surgery to establish the diagnosis, reduce the fungal mass, and provide a rationale for using posaconazole.

Prophylactic antibiotics or G-CSF for the prevention of infections and improvement of survival in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy

BACKGROUND: Febrile neutropenia (FN) and other infectious complications are some of the most serious treatment-related toxicities of chemotherapy for cancer, with a mortality rate of 2% to 21%. The two main types of prophylactic regimens are granulocyte (G-CSF) or granulocyte-macrophage colony stimulating factors (GM-CSF); and antibiotics, frequently quinolones or cotrimoxazole. Important current guidelines recommend the use of colony stimulating factors when the risk of febrile neutropenia is above 20% but they do not mention the use of antibiotics. However, both regimens have been shown to reduce the incidence of infections. Since no systematic review has compared the two regimens, a systematic review was undertaken. OBJECTIVES: To compare the effectiveness of G-CSF or GM-CSF with antibiotics in cancer patients receiving myeloablative chemotherapy with respect to preventing fever, febrile neutropenia, infection, infection-related mortality, early mortality and improving quality of life. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, databases of ongoing trials, and conference proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the American Society of Hematology (1980 to 2007). We planned to include both full-text and abstract publications. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing prophylaxis with G-CSF or GM-CSF versus antibiotics in cancer patients of all ages receiving chemotherapy or bone marrow or stem cell transplantation were included for review. Both study arms had to receive identical chemotherapy regimes and other supportive care. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Trial eligibility and quality assessment, data extraction and analysis were done in duplicate. Authors were contacted to obtain missing data. MAIN RESULTS: We included two eligible randomised controlled trials with 195 patients. Due to differences in the outcomes reported, the trials could not be pooled for meta-analysis. Both trials showed non-significant results favouring antibiotics for the prevention of fever or hospitalisation for febrile neutropenia. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence for or against antibiotics compared to G(M)-CSFs for the prevention of infections in cancer patients.

Japanese-US common-arm analysis of paclitaxel plus carboplatin in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a model for assessing population-related pharmacogenomics

PURPOSE To explore whether population-related pharmacogenomics contribute to differences in patient outcomes between clinical trials performed in Japan and the United States, given similar study designs, eligibility criteria, staging, and treatment regimens. METHODS We prospectively designed and conducted three phase III trials (Four-Arm Cooperative Study, LC00-03, and S0003) in advanced-stage, non-small-cell lung cancer, each with a common arm of paclitaxel plus carboplatin. Genomic DNA was collected from patients in LC00-03 and S0003 who received paclitaxel (225 mg/m(2)) and carboplatin (area under the concentration-time curve, 6). Genotypic variants of CYP3A4, CYP3A5, CYP2C8, NR1I2-206, ABCB1, ERCC1, and ERCC2 were analyzed by pyrosequencing or by PCR restriction fragment length polymorphism. Results were assessed by Cox model for survival and by logistic regression for response and toxicity. Results Clinical results were similar in the two Japanese trials, and were significantly different from the US trial, for survival, neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, and anemia. There was a significant difference between Japanese and US patients in genotypic distribution for CYP3A4*1B (P = .01), CYP3A5*3C (P = .03), ERCC1 118 (P < .0001), ERCC2 K751Q (P < .001), and CYP2C8 R139K (P = .01). Genotypic associations were observed between CYP3A4*1B for progression-free survival (hazard ratio [HR], 0.36; 95% CI, 0.14 to 0.94; P = .04) and ERCC2 K751Q for response (HR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.83; P = .02). For grade 4 neutropenia, the HR for ABCB1 3425C-->T was 1.84 (95% CI, 0.77 to 4.48; P = .19). CONCLUSION Differences in allelic distribution for genes involved in paclitaxel disposition or DNA repair were observed between Japanese and US patients. In an exploratory analysis, genotype-related associations with patient outcomes were observed for CYP3A4*1B and ERCC2 K751Q. This common-arm approach facilitates the prospective study of population-related pharmacogenomics in which ethnic differences in antineoplastic drug disposition are anticipated.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy followed by surgery in selected patients with stage IIIB non-small-cell lung cancer: a multicentre phase II trial

BACKGROUND: Stage IIIB non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is usually thought to be unresectable, and is managed with chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy. However, selected patients might benefit from surgical resection after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy. The aim of this multicentre, phase II trial was to assess the efficacy and toxicity of a neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy followed by surgery in patients with technically operable stage IIIB NSCLC. METHODS: Between September, 2001, and May, 2006, patients with pathologically proven and technically resectable stage IIIB NSCLC were sequentially treated with three cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (cisplatin with docetaxel), immediately followed by accelerated concomitant boost radiotherapy (44 Gy in 22 fractions) and definitive surgery. The primary endpoint was event-free survival at 12 months. Efficacy analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00030810. FINDINGS: 46 patients were enrolled, with a median age of 60 years (range 28-70). 13 (28%) patients had N3 disease, 36 (78%) had T4 disease. All patients received chemotherapy; 35 (76%) patients received radiotherapy. The main toxicities during chemotherapy were neutropenia (25 patients [54%] at grade 3 or 4) and febrile neutropenia (nine [20%]); the main toxicity after radiotherapy was oesophagitis (ten patients [29%]; nine grade 2, one grade 3). 35 patients (76%) underwent surgery, with pneumonectomy in 17 patients. A complete (R0) resection was achieved in 27 patients. Peri-operative complications occurred in 14 patients, including two deaths (30-day mortality 5.7%). Seven patients required a second surgical intervention. Pathological mediastinal downstaging was seen in 11 of the 28 patients who had lymph-node involvement at enrolment, a complete pathological response was seen in six patients. Event-free survival at 12 months was 54% (95% CI 39-67). After a median follow-up of 58 months, the median overall survival was 29 months (95% CI 16.1-NA), with survival at 1, 3, and 5 years of 67% (95% CI 52-79), 47% (32-61), and 40% (24-55). INTERPRETATION: A treatment strategy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy followed by surgery is feasible in selected patients. Toxicity is considerable, but manageable. Survival compares favourably with historical results of combined treatment for less advanced stage IIIA disease. FUNDING: Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK) and an unrestricted educational grant by Sanofi-Aventis (Switzerland).

Chemotherapy for isolated locoregional recurrence of breast cancer (CALOR): a randomised trial.

BACKGROUND Patients with isolated locoregional recurrences (ILRR) of breast cancer have a high risk of distant metastasis and death from breast cancer. We aimed to establish whether adjuvant chemotherapy improves the outcome of such patients. METHODS The CALOR trial was a pragmatic, open-label, randomised trial that accrued patients with histologically proven and completely excised ILRR after unilateral breast cancer who had undergone a mastectomy or lumpectomy with clear surgical margins. Eligible patients were enrolled from hospitals worldwide and were centrally randomised (1:1) to chemotherapy (type selected by the investigator; multidrug for at least four courses recommended) or no chemotherapy, using permuted blocks, and stratified by previous chemotherapy, oestrogen-receptor and progesterone-receptor status, and location of ILRR. Patients with oestrogen-receptor-positive ILRR received adjuvant endocrine therapy, radiation therapy was mandated for patients with microscopically involved surgical margins, and anti-HER2 therapy was optional. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival. All analyses were by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00074152. FINDINGS From Aug 22, 2003, to Jan 31, 2010, 85 patients were randomly assigned to receive chemotherapy and 77 were assigned to no chemotherapy. At a median follow-up of 4·9 years (IQR 3·6-6 ·0), 24 (28%) patients had disease-free survival events in the chemotherapy group compared with 34 (44%) in the no chemotherapy group. 5-year disease-free survival was 69% (95% CI 56-79) with chemotherapy versus 57% (44-67) without chemotherapy (hazard ratio 0·59 [95% CI 0·35-0·99]; p=0·046). Adjuvant chemotherapy was significantly more effective for women with oestrogen-receptor-negative ILRR (pinteraction=0·046), but analyses of disease-free survival according to the oestrogen-receptor status of the primary tumour were not statistically significant (pinteraction=0·43). Of the 81 patients who received chemotherapy, 12 (15%) had serious adverse events. The most common adverse events were neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, and intestinal infection. INTERPRETATION Adjuvant chemotherapy should be recommended for patients with completely resected ILRR of breast cancer, especially if the recurrence is oestrogen-receptor negative. FUNDING US Department of Health and Human Services, Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research (SAKK), Frontier Science and Technology Research Foundation, Australian and New Zealand Breast Cancer Trials Group, Swedish Cancer Society, Oncosuisse, Cancer Association of South Africa, Foundation for Clinical Research of Eastern Switzerland (OSKK), Grupo Español de Investigación en Cáncer de Mama (GEICAM), and the Dutch Breast Cancer Trialists' Group (BOOG).

Prophylactic antibiotics or G(M)-CSF for the prevention of infections and improvement of survival in cancer patients receiving myelotoxic chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND Febrile neutropenia (FN) and other infectious complications are some of the most serious treatment-related toxicities of chemotherapy for cancer, with a mortality rate of 2% to 21%. The two main types of prophylactic regimens are granulocyte (macrophage) colony-stimulating factors (G(M)-CSF) and antibiotics, frequently quinolones or cotrimoxazole. Current guidelines recommend the use of colony-stimulating factors when the risk of febrile neutropenia is above 20%, but they do not mention the use of antibiotics. However, both regimens have been shown to reduce the incidence of infections. Since no systematic review has compared the two regimens, a systematic review was undertaken. OBJECTIVES To compare the efficacy and safety of G(M)-CSF compared to antibiotics in cancer patients receiving myelotoxic chemotherapy. SEARCH METHODS We searched The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, databases of ongoing trials, and conference proceedings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the American Society of Hematology (1980 to December 2015). We planned to include both full-text and abstract publications. Two review authors independently screened search results. SELECTION CRITERIA We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing prophylaxis with G(M)-CSF versus antibiotics for the prevention of infection in cancer patients of all ages receiving chemotherapy. All study arms had to receive identical chemotherapy regimes and other supportive care. We included full-text, abstracts, and unpublished data if sufficient information on study design, participant characteristics, interventions and outcomes was available. We excluded cross-over trials, quasi-randomised trials and post-hoc retrospective trials. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Two review authors independently screened the results of the search strategies, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and analysed data according to standard Cochrane methods. We did final interpretation together with an experienced clinician. MAIN RESULTS In this updated review, we included no new randomised controlled trials. We included two trials in the review, one with 40 breast cancer patients receiving high-dose chemotherapy and G-CSF compared to antibiotics, a second one evaluating 155 patients with small-cell lung cancer receiving GM-CSF or antibiotics.We judge the overall risk of bias as high in the G-CSF trial, as neither patients nor physicians were blinded and not all included patients were analysed as randomised (7 out of 40 patients). We considered the overall risk of bias in the GM-CSF to be moderate, because of the risk of performance bias (neither patients nor personnel were blinded), but low risk of selection and attrition bias.For the trial comparing G-CSF to antibiotics, all cause mortality was not reported. There was no evidence of a difference for infection-related mortality, with zero events in each arm. Microbiologically or clinically documented infections, severe infections, quality of life, and adverse events were not reported. There was no evidence of a difference in frequency of febrile neutropenia (risk ratio (RR) 1.22; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 2.84). The quality of the evidence for the two reported outcomes, infection-related mortality and frequency of febrile neutropenia, was very low, due to the low number of patients evaluated (high imprecision) and the high risk of bias.There was no evidence of a difference in terms of median survival time in the trial comparing GM-CSF and antibiotics. Two-year survival times were 6% (0 to 12%) in both arms (high imprecision, low quality of evidence). There were four toxic deaths in the GM-CSF arm and three in the antibiotics arm (3.8%), without evidence of a difference (RR 1.32; 95% CI 0.30 to 5.69; P = 0.71; low quality of evidence). There were 28% grade III or IV infections in the GM-CSF arm and 18% in the antibiotics arm, without any evidence of a difference (RR 1.55; 95% CI 0.86 to 2.80; P = 0.15, low quality of evidence). There were 5 episodes out of 360 cycles of grade IV infections in the GM-CSF arm and 3 episodes out of 334 cycles in the cotrimoxazole arm (0.8%), with no evidence of a difference (RR 1.55; 95% CI 0.37 to 6.42; P = 0.55; low quality of evidence). There was no significant difference between the two arms for non-haematological toxicities like diarrhoea, stomatitis, infections, neurologic, respiratory, or cardiac adverse events. Grade III and IV thrombopenia occurred significantly more frequently in the GM-CSF arm (60.8%) compared to the antibiotics arm (28.9%); (RR 2.10; 95% CI 1.41 to 3.12; P = 0.0002; low quality of evidence). Neither infection-related mortality, incidence of febrile neutropenia, nor quality of life were reported in this trial. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS As we only found two small trials with 195 patients altogether, no conclusion for clinical practice is possible. More trials are necessary to assess the benefits and harms of G(M)-CSF compared to antibiotics for infection prevention in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy.

[Recurrent febrile episodes--normal, periodic fever syndrome or immunodeficiency?]

Fever is one of the main symptoms leading to medical evaluation. Not only infections cause fever but also inflammatory disorders. To distinguish one from another, a thorough medical history and clinical evaluation are needed. Sometimes, only the clinical course will reveal the diagnosis. PFAPA-Syndrome (periodic fever, aphthous stomatitis, pharyngitis, adenitis) is the most frequent periodic fever syndrome in Switzerland. No diagnostic test is available to support the diagnosis. Some important diseases have to be ruled out, such as Immunodeficiency, cyclic neutropenia, chronic viral infections and rheumatologic disorders. To know the diagnosis of the PFAPA-Syndrome can help avoiding antibiotic courses for febrile episodes in infants. There is a clinical overlap to hereditary periodic fever syndromes as familial Mediterranean fever (FMF), Hyper-IgD and fever syndrome (HIDS), Tumor-necrosis factor receptor associated periodic syndrome (TRAPS) and others, in which a genetic basis for the disease has already been found.