Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Clinical efficacy and safety of biapenem for febrile neutropenia in patients with underlying hematopoietic diseases: a multi-institutional study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Infection and Chemotherapy

    We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

    Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

An Erratum to this article was published on 08 December 2010

Abstract

A multi-institutional study was conducted to assess efficacy and safety of biapenem (BIPM), a carbapenem antibiotic, as an initial-stage therapeutic agent for febrile neutropenia (FN) in patients with hematopoietic diseases. A total of 216 patients from 25 medical institutions were enrolled in this study; of these, 204 were included in the safety analysis and 178 in the efficacy analysis. The combined (excellent and good) response rate was 67.9%, and antipyretic effect (subsidence + tendency to subsidence) was achieved within 3 and 5 days of treatment in 67.3 and 75.9% of patients, respectively. Thus, the clinical responses were gratifying. A response rate of 61.7% (37/60) was observed even in high-risk FN patients in whom neutrophil counts prior to and at 72 h after the start of BIPM were ≤100/μl. BIPM is considered to be a highly promising drug, with prompt onset of clinical benefit, as an initial-stage therapeutic agent for the treatment of FN in patients with hematopoietic diseases.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Patients with fever obviously not attributable to infection were excluded.

References

  1. Hughes WT, Armstrong D, Bodey GP, Feld R, Mandell GL, Meyers JD, From the Infectious Diseases Society of America, et al. Guidelines for the use of antimicrobial agents in neutropenic patients with unexplained fever. J Infect Dis. 1990;161:381–96.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hughes WT, Armstrong D, Bodey GP, Brown AE, Edwards JE, Feld R, et al. 1997 guidelines for the use of antimicrobial agents in neutropenic patients with unexplained fever. Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 1997;25:551–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Hughes WT, Armstrong D, Bodey GP, Bow EJ, Brown AE, Calandra T, et al. 2002 guidelines for the use of antimicrobial agents in neutropenic patients with cancer. Clin Infect Dis. 2002;34:730–51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Masaoka T. Conclusions and recommendations: evidence-based recommendations for antimicrobial use in febrile neutropenia in Japan. Int J Hematol. 1998;68:S39.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Hikida M, Kawashima K, Yoshida M, Mitsuhashi S. Inactivation of new carbapenem antibiotics by dehydropeptidase-1 from porcine and human renal cortex. J Antimicrob Chemother. 1992;30:129–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Sakai H, Sanada M, Shimamoto K, Azuma R, Harada H, Mori H, et al. Clinical evaluation of biapenem for febrile neutropenia in patients with hematological disorders. Jpn J Antibiot. 2007;60:125–31 (Japanese).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Kasahara S, Hara T, Tsurumi H, Goto N, Kanemura N, Yoshikawa T, et al. Clinical effects of biapenem on febrile neutropenia in patients with hematological malignancy. Jpn J Antibiot. 2008;61:115–21 (Japanese).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Sasada M. Anti-infection measures. Nippon Rinsho. 2007;65:S445–9 (Japanese).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Yamaguchi K, Ishii Y, Iwata M, Watanabe N, Uehara N, Yasujima M, et al. Nationwide surveillance of parenteral antibiotics containing meropenem activities against clinically isolated strains in 2006. Jpn J Antibiot. 2007;60:344–77 (Japanese).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Matsumoto F, Inoue M, Sakurai I, Ishida Y, Osonoi T, Itoh H, et al. A comparative study of biapenem and imipenem/cilastatin in lower respiratory infections. Jpn J Chemother. 2000;48:45–67 (Japanese).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Shibata H, Yamane T, Sakamoto E, Nakamae H, Ohta K, Hino M. Clinical analysis of antibiotic treatment for febrile neutropenia. Jpn J Antibiot. 2005;58:382–7 (Japanese).

    Google Scholar 

  12. Urabe A, Mutoh Y, Mizoguchi H, Toyama K, Oshimi K, Suzuki K, et al. Efficacy and safety of panipenem/betamipron (PAPM/BP) in the treatment of infections accompanying hematologic diseases. Antibiot Chemother. 1998;14:119–26 (Japanese).

    Google Scholar 

  13. Sawae Y, Niho Y, Okamura T, Gondo H, Suehiro Y, Kumakawa M, et al. Comparison between monotherapy with imipenem/cilastatin sodium (IPM/CS) and combinations of IPM/CS and other drugs for treating bacterial infections in patients with hematopoietic disorders. Jpn J Antibiot. 1996;49:1049–61 (Japanese).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Bodey GP, Rodriguez V, Chang HY, Narboni G. Fever and infection in leukemic patients: a study of 494 consecutive patients. Cancer. 1978;41:1610–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Craig WA. Interrelationship between pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic in determining dosage regimens for broad-spectrum cephalosporins. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 1995;22:89–96.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Craig WA. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic parameters: rationale for antibacterial dosing of mice and men. Clin Infect Dis. 1998;26:1–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Craig WA. The role of pharmacodynamics in effective treatment of community-acquired pathogens. Adv Stud Med. 2002;2:126–34.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Drusano GL. Prevention of resistance: a goal for dose selection for antimicrobial agents. Clin Infect Dis. 2003;36:S42–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Takata T, Aizawa K, Shimizu A, Sakakibara S, Watabe H, Totsuka K. Optimization of dose and dose regimen of biapenem based on pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analysis. J Infect Chemother. 2004;10:76–85.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Tamura K, Matsuoka H, Tsukada J, Masuda M, Ikeda S, Matsuishi E, et al. Cefepime or carbapenem treatment for febrile neutropenia as a single agent is as effective as a combination of 4th-generation cephalosporin + aminoglycosides: comparative study. Am J Hematol. 2002;71:248–55.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Tamura K, Imajo K, Akiyama N, Suzuki K, Urabe A, Ohyashiki K, et al. Randomized trial of cefepime monotherapy or cefepime in combination with amikacin as empirical therapy for febrile neutropenia. Clin Infect Dis. 2004;39:S15–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Klastersky J. Treatment of neutropenic infection: trends towards monotherapy? Support Care Cancer. 1997;5:365–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Ramphal R. Changes in the etiology of bacteremia in febrile neutropenic patients and the susceptibilities of the currently isolated pathogens. Clin Infect Dis. 2004;39:S25–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are indebted to all doctors involved in this group study from the institutions listed in Table 13.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yasunori Nakagawa.

Additional information

For the Study Group for Infectious Disease involved in hematopoietic diseases.

An erratum to this article can be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10156-010-0185-y

About this article

Cite this article

Nakagawa, Y., Suzuki, K., Hirose, T. et al. Clinical efficacy and safety of biapenem for febrile neutropenia in patients with underlying hematopoietic diseases: a multi-institutional study. J Infect Chemother 17, 58–67 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10156-010-0075-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10156-010-0075-3

Keywords

Navigation