Antibiotic Stewardship in Suspected Neutropenic Fever (ASTERIC Trial)
NCT ID: NCT06794320
Last Updated: 2025-01-27
Study Results
Results pending
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
Recruitment Status
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
Clinical Phase
NA
Total Enrollment
648 participants
Study Classification
INTERVENTIONAL
Study Start Date
2025-02-01
Study Completion Date
2026-12-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Executive Summary
Background: Neutropenic Fever (NF), or febrile neutropenia, occurs in patients with early stage and metastatic solid tumours, non-leukaemic haematological cancers and acute leukaemia. It has a crude mortality rate of 3 to 18%. In Hong Kong, and in line with international guidelines, the target time from ED registration to ultra-broad spectrum antibiotic (UBSA) administration (door-to-antibiotic time, DTA time) is one hour disregarding the absolute neutrophil count (ANC). However, over 80% patients presenting to hospital with suspected NF (sNF) do not have NF and do not require UBSAs. Thus there is a need for evidence for a safe role for early treatments in patients with sNF to reduce unnecessary use of antibiotics.
Protocol, Eligibility and Randomisation: This protocol describes the ASTERIC Trial, a pragmatic, multi-centre, type 1, hybrid effectiveness-implementation, stepped-wedge, before and after, cluster randomised controlled trial with variable baseline and follow up periods. Hospitals will be randomised to start dates comparing usual standard of care (SoC) (Period 1, before) with a new antibiotic stewardship protocol (Period 2, after). Hospitals, not patients, are randomised to variable start dates. The evidence for starting early UBSAs in patients with NF is well-established. What is unclear is how to optimise personalised care and the start times of UBSA when the majority of sNF patients do not have NF, there are delays to receiving an ANC report, and a proportion of patients might not need hospital admission.
Study design: a multi-centre, hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation trial which is an appropriate study design to evaluate the real-world effectiveness of an antibiotic stewardship protocol; and the barriers to and facilitators of its implementation in the ED setting.
Settings: Eight hospitals in Hong Kong with patient involvement 24/7.
Outcomes: The Trial has two co-primary outcomes 1) mean total dose of UBSAs prescribed in 7 days and censored at 30 days from the time of randomisation; 2) safety (defined as the proportion of patients with a SAE), censored at 30 days from the time of randomisation.
This multifaceted trial addresses three broad domains of implementation according to Proctor's conceptual framework and taxonomy which incorporates the RE-AIM framework, namely: Service Outcomes; Implementation Outcomes and Client outcomes. Simplicity on the frontline: Patient enrolment and other front-line trial procedures will be streamlined. Informed consent is brief and simple and required for follow-up. Follow-up information may be ascertained by contacting participants in person, by phone or electronically, or by review of medical records and databases.
Data to be collected: Information will be collected on the patient, age, sex, major co-morbidity, sNF symptom onset date and severity, as well as any contraindications to study treatments. Follow-up information includes antibiotics - name, dose and duration; SAEs; mortality; sepsis; length of hospital stay; cost-effectiveness; patient satisfaction.
Numbers: 648 patients (324 patients in each group) adult patients with sNF ≥38.3ºC and Modified Early Warning Score ≤6 within 24 hours of ED registration.
Benefit to Healthcare/Expected results: Study results will inform health policy with improvement in hospital services in treating stable sNF evidenced by improved personalised, safe antibiotic stewardship, early antibiotic de-escalation, early discharge, and reduced costs and length of stay. The ASTERIC protocol safely reduces the type, duration and dose of antibiotics.
Background: Neutropenic Fever (NF), or febrile neutropenia, occurs in patients with early stage and metastatic solid tumours, non-leukaemic haematological cancers and acute leukaemia. It has a crude mortality rate of 3 to 18%. In Hong Kong, and in line with international guidelines, the target time from ED registration to ultra-broad spectrum antibiotic (UBSA) administration (door-to-antibiotic time, DTA time) is one hour disregarding the absolute neutrophil count (ANC). However, over 80% patients presenting to hospital with suspected NF (sNF) do not have NF and do not require UBSAs. Thus there is a need for evidence for a safe role for early treatments in patients with sNF to reduce unnecessary use of antibiotics.
Protocol, Eligibility and Randomisation: This protocol describes the ASTERIC Trial, a pragmatic, multi-centre, type 1, hybrid effectiveness-implementation, stepped-wedge, before and after, cluster randomised controlled trial with variable baseline and follow up periods. Hospitals will be randomised to start dates comparing usual standard of care (SoC) (Period 1, before) with a new antibiotic stewardship protocol (Period 2, after). Hospitals, not patients, are randomised to variable start dates. The evidence for starting early UBSAs in patients with NF is well-established. What is unclear is how to optimise personalised care and the start times of UBSA when the majority of sNF patients do not have NF, there are delays to receiving an ANC report, and a proportion of patients might not need hospital admission.
Study design: a multi-centre, hybrid type 1 effectiveness-implementation trial which is an appropriate study design to evaluate the real-world effectiveness of an antibiotic stewardship protocol; and the barriers to and facilitators of its implementation in the ED setting.
Settings: Eight hospitals in Hong Kong with patient involvement 24/7.
Outcomes: The Trial has two co-primary outcomes 1) mean total dose of UBSAs prescribed in 7 days and censored at 30 days from the time of randomisation; 2) safety (defined as the proportion of patients with a SAE), censored at 30 days from the time of randomisation.
This multifaceted trial addresses three broad domains of implementation according to Proctor's conceptual framework and taxonomy which incorporates the RE-AIM framework, namely: Service Outcomes; Implementation Outcomes and Client outcomes. Simplicity on the frontline: Patient enrolment and other front-line trial procedures will be streamlined. Informed consent is brief and simple and required for follow-up. Follow-up information may be ascertained by contacting participants in person, by phone or electronically, or by review of medical records and databases.
Data to be collected: Information will be collected on the patient, age, sex, major co-morbidity, sNF symptom onset date and severity, as well as any contraindications to study treatments. Follow-up information includes antibiotics - name, dose and duration; SAEs; mortality; sepsis; length of hospital stay; cost-effectiveness; patient satisfaction.
Numbers: 648 patients (324 patients in each group) adult patients with sNF ≥38.3ºC and Modified Early Warning Score ≤6 within 24 hours of ED registration.
Benefit to Healthcare/Expected results: Study results will inform health policy with improvement in hospital services in treating stable sNF evidenced by improved personalised, safe antibiotic stewardship, early antibiotic de-escalation, early discharge, and reduced costs and length of stay. The ASTERIC protocol safely reduces the type, duration and dose of antibiotics.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Fast-track Blood Test for Suspected Fever by Deficiency of a Kind of White Blood Cells As Main Defense Against Infection
NCT05393505
Neutropenic Fever
UNKNOWN
PHASE4
Levofloxacin Prophylaxis to Prevent First Febrile Neutropenia in Pediatric ALL During Induction Phase
NCT07320534
Neutropenic Fever
Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia
NOT_YET_RECRUITING
PHASE4
An Open Label Trial of Azithromycin in Chronic Productive Cough
NCT02196493
Chronic Cough
UNKNOWN
PHASE3
A Randomized, Open Label, Clinical Trial of the Pharmacokinetics of Azithromycin Following a Single Dose of Azithromycin Sustained Release (2 Gram) or Commercial Azithromycin Tablet (500 mg) to Cancer Patients That Require Lung Surgery
NCT00644176
Pharmacokinetics
COMPLETED
PHASE2
Low-risk Fever and Neutropenia in Children With Cancer: Safety and Efficacy of Oral Antibiotics in an Outpatient Setting
NCT00107081
Fever
Neutropenia
Cancer
TERMINATED
PHASE3
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
1 Background and Rationale
1.1 Background
Burden of neutropenic fever Neutropenic fever (NF), or febrile neutropenia, is characterised by a high body temperature and low absolute neutrophil count (ANC) after myelosuppressive cancer treatment. It occurs in patients with early-stage and metastatic solid tumours, non-leukaemic haematological cancers and acute leukaemia. The crude mortality rate varies from 3 to 18%. In the United States (US), each year, 7.83 per 1,000 cancer patients are hospitalised with NF. The mean direct hospitalisation costs of managing NF vary from EUR3,950 \[about HKD$ 34,000\] to US$19,110 \[about HKD$150,000\] per patient.
Aetiology
NF can have infectious and non-infectious causes. Although 30 - 50% cases appear clinically to be infections only 20 - 30% have microbiologically documented infections. Bloodstream infections, bacterial translocations from the respiratory tract and perianal region, and from the central venous catheter are major sources.
Fever may be the only manifestation of infection during neutropenia because the typical signs of inflammation are obscured. Neutropenia usually results from myelosuppressive cancer treatments, pre-engraftment phases of haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), bone marrow failure and/or defective neutrophil maturation.
Neutropenic Fever
NF is defined by 1) a single oral temperature ≥38.3ºC (101ºF), or a sustained temperature ≥38.0ºC (100.4ºF) over 1 hour; and 2) an ANC \<1.0 x 10\^9/L ("moderate" neutropenia). Neutropenia is classified as "severe", "profound" or "protracted" if the ANC is 0.5 x 10\^9/L, \<0.1 x 10\^9/L, or lasts for more than one week, respectively. This definition only applies to oncological and haematological patients.
In Hong Kong
Local public emergency departments (EDs) have standard operating procedures and guidelines for managing NF. In line with international guidelines the target time from ED registration to antibiotic administration (door-to-antibiotic time, DTA time) is one hour disregarding ANC. The clinical pathways for suspected NF (sNF) expedites medical consultation, septic workup, and early prescription of ultra-broad spectrum antibiotics (UBSAs) such as Meropenem or Piperacillin/ Tazobactam. After implementing clinical pathways in local EDs, DTA times have shortened.
However, over 80% patients presenting to Hong Kong's Queen Mary Hospital with sNF have an ANC\>1x10\^9/L, do not have NF, do not require UBSAs and possibly do not require hospital admission. Widespread, inappropriate use of UBSAs may contribute to the emergence of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and multi-drug resistance strains (MDR). Thus, there is a need for prudent, pragmatic, personalised antibiotic stewardship and appropriate de-escalation.
Antibiotic stewardship for cancer patients
As cancer patients are frequently prescribed antibiotics, they are more vulnerable to MDR, and are in special need of antibiotic stewardship. UBSAs are often started empirically in the ED for patients with sNF, assuming infection by drug-resistant bacteria. However, clinicians infrequently de-escalate once antibiotics have been started. Prolonged exposure to parenteral broad-spectrum antibiotic (BSA) impose risks of nosocomial infection and injection site complications. There is also evidence that meeting the one hour target does not improve outcomes but using appropriate antibiotic regimes does.
Research Gap and Unmet Clinical Need
Evidence-based practices are slow to be implemented into routine care. Implementation science seeks to narrow the research-to practice gap by identifying barriers and facilitators to effective implementation and designing strategies to achieve desired implementation outcomes. Most patients with sNF receive UBSAs. Yet \<20% have confirmed NF and 16% have a confirmed microbe. Therefore, it is likely that antibiotics are being used inappropriately. There are knowledge gaps on methods for rapidly delivering ANC results in the acute setting; microbiological patterns (AMR and MDR rates); service, implementation and client outcomes; a lack of understanding on physician and nursing attitudes, perceptions and practice; a lack of good evidence on the real-world effectiveness, safety, and cost-implications of good prescribing practice (antibiotic stewardship and de-escalation); and a need for evidence-based education in patients with sNF. Implementation science supports translational medicine research to practice gaps. It identifies barriers and facilitators to effective implementation and designs evolving strategies to achieve desired service, implementation and client outcomes. This proposal addresses these issues.
1.2 Treatment Strategies
There is good evidence that patients with NF presenting to hospital benefit from early UBSA/BSA treatment and this is reflected in current guidelines. There is also good evidence that patients with NF and a high Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) Risk Index do not need to be admitted to hospital. However, some healthcare settings have adopted a one hour limit on starting BSA/UBSA treatment and admit all patients to hospital. As ANC results are not usually available within one hour, more than 80% sNF may be treated unnecessarily with inappropriate antibiotics. Consequently, there is a need for implementation studies to identify barriers and facilitators of care, and to optimise early management.
There is currently little clinical evidence for the early management of sNF patients presenting to hospital. Early BSA/UBSA is recommended for patients with NF but the evidence for a strict one hour target for the first dose of antibiotics in patients with sNF has little evidence base. Most protocols would not recommend starting antibiotics where they are not necessary.
All patients with sNF will receive SoC during the first period in the participating hospitals. Later, hospitals will switch to the ASTERIC. Initially randomisation will be between hospitals to determine the time that each hospital will convert to the new protocol:
Period 1, Before: Although there is evidence that early treatment of sNF with UBSAs is safe, a high proportion of patients receive antibiotics unnecessarily. Thus, there is uncertainty over implementing personalised care and strategies to optimises antibiotic stewardship.
Period 2, After: The ASTERIC protocol seeks to safely optimise personalised care.
1.1 Background
Burden of neutropenic fever Neutropenic fever (NF), or febrile neutropenia, is characterised by a high body temperature and low absolute neutrophil count (ANC) after myelosuppressive cancer treatment. It occurs in patients with early-stage and metastatic solid tumours, non-leukaemic haematological cancers and acute leukaemia. The crude mortality rate varies from 3 to 18%. In the United States (US), each year, 7.83 per 1,000 cancer patients are hospitalised with NF. The mean direct hospitalisation costs of managing NF vary from EUR3,950 \[about HKD$ 34,000\] to US$19,110 \[about HKD$150,000\] per patient.
Aetiology
NF can have infectious and non-infectious causes. Although 30 - 50% cases appear clinically to be infections only 20 - 30% have microbiologically documented infections. Bloodstream infections, bacterial translocations from the respiratory tract and perianal region, and from the central venous catheter are major sources.
Fever may be the only manifestation of infection during neutropenia because the typical signs of inflammation are obscured. Neutropenia usually results from myelosuppressive cancer treatments, pre-engraftment phases of haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), bone marrow failure and/or defective neutrophil maturation.
Neutropenic Fever
NF is defined by 1) a single oral temperature ≥38.3ºC (101ºF), or a sustained temperature ≥38.0ºC (100.4ºF) over 1 hour; and 2) an ANC \<1.0 x 10\^9/L ("moderate" neutropenia). Neutropenia is classified as "severe", "profound" or "protracted" if the ANC is 0.5 x 10\^9/L, \<0.1 x 10\^9/L, or lasts for more than one week, respectively. This definition only applies to oncological and haematological patients.
In Hong Kong
Local public emergency departments (EDs) have standard operating procedures and guidelines for managing NF. In line with international guidelines the target time from ED registration to antibiotic administration (door-to-antibiotic time, DTA time) is one hour disregarding ANC. The clinical pathways for suspected NF (sNF) expedites medical consultation, septic workup, and early prescription of ultra-broad spectrum antibiotics (UBSAs) such as Meropenem or Piperacillin/ Tazobactam. After implementing clinical pathways in local EDs, DTA times have shortened.
However, over 80% patients presenting to Hong Kong's Queen Mary Hospital with sNF have an ANC\>1x10\^9/L, do not have NF, do not require UBSAs and possibly do not require hospital admission. Widespread, inappropriate use of UBSAs may contribute to the emergence of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and multi-drug resistance strains (MDR). Thus, there is a need for prudent, pragmatic, personalised antibiotic stewardship and appropriate de-escalation.
Antibiotic stewardship for cancer patients
As cancer patients are frequently prescribed antibiotics, they are more vulnerable to MDR, and are in special need of antibiotic stewardship. UBSAs are often started empirically in the ED for patients with sNF, assuming infection by drug-resistant bacteria. However, clinicians infrequently de-escalate once antibiotics have been started. Prolonged exposure to parenteral broad-spectrum antibiotic (BSA) impose risks of nosocomial infection and injection site complications. There is also evidence that meeting the one hour target does not improve outcomes but using appropriate antibiotic regimes does.
Research Gap and Unmet Clinical Need
Evidence-based practices are slow to be implemented into routine care. Implementation science seeks to narrow the research-to practice gap by identifying barriers and facilitators to effective implementation and designing strategies to achieve desired implementation outcomes. Most patients with sNF receive UBSAs. Yet \<20% have confirmed NF and 16% have a confirmed microbe. Therefore, it is likely that antibiotics are being used inappropriately. There are knowledge gaps on methods for rapidly delivering ANC results in the acute setting; microbiological patterns (AMR and MDR rates); service, implementation and client outcomes; a lack of understanding on physician and nursing attitudes, perceptions and practice; a lack of good evidence on the real-world effectiveness, safety, and cost-implications of good prescribing practice (antibiotic stewardship and de-escalation); and a need for evidence-based education in patients with sNF. Implementation science supports translational medicine research to practice gaps. It identifies barriers and facilitators to effective implementation and designs evolving strategies to achieve desired service, implementation and client outcomes. This proposal addresses these issues.
1.2 Treatment Strategies
There is good evidence that patients with NF presenting to hospital benefit from early UBSA/BSA treatment and this is reflected in current guidelines. There is also good evidence that patients with NF and a high Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) Risk Index do not need to be admitted to hospital. However, some healthcare settings have adopted a one hour limit on starting BSA/UBSA treatment and admit all patients to hospital. As ANC results are not usually available within one hour, more than 80% sNF may be treated unnecessarily with inappropriate antibiotics. Consequently, there is a need for implementation studies to identify barriers and facilitators of care, and to optimise early management.
There is currently little clinical evidence for the early management of sNF patients presenting to hospital. Early BSA/UBSA is recommended for patients with NF but the evidence for a strict one hour target for the first dose of antibiotics in patients with sNF has little evidence base. Most protocols would not recommend starting antibiotics where they are not necessary.
All patients with sNF will receive SoC during the first period in the participating hospitals. Later, hospitals will switch to the ASTERIC. Initially randomisation will be between hospitals to determine the time that each hospital will convert to the new protocol:
Period 1, Before: Although there is evidence that early treatment of sNF with UBSAs is safe, a high proportion of patients receive antibiotics unnecessarily. Thus, there is uncertainty over implementing personalised care and strategies to optimises antibiotic stewardship.
Period 2, After: The ASTERIC protocol seeks to safely optimise personalised care.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Neutropenic Fever
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
Allocation Method
RANDOMIZED
Intervention Model
SEQUENTIAL
Primary Study Purpose
TREATMENT
Blinding Strategy
NONE
type 1 hybrid effectiveness-implementation, stepped-wedge, randomised controlled trial
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Period 1(Before): Standard of Care(SoC) + Neutropenic Fever(NF) Protocol
Group Type
OTHER
NF Protocol
Intervention Type
OTHER
The daily practice of physicians in evaluating and treating patients with sNF.
Period 2(After): SoC + ASTERIC Protocol
The ASTERIC protocol seeks to evaluate and address barriers and facilitators to a fast-track ANC service coupled with prudent, timely antibiotic stewardship and assessment of admission.
Group Type
OTHER
ASTERIC protocol
Intervention Type
OTHER
i. Risk-assessment tools
ASTERIC protocol
Intervention Type
OTHER
ii. Fast track absolute neutrophil counts turnaround service
ASTERIC Protocol
Intervention Type
OTHER
iii. A decision tool for patient management and initial antibiotic use
ASTERIC Protocol
Intervention Type
OTHER
iv. A decision tool for patient management and subsequent antibiotic use
ASTERIC Protocol
Intervention Type
OTHER
v. An educational package
ASTERIC Protocol
Intervention Type
OTHER
vi. A decision tool for patient disposal - discharge or emergency department ward observation
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
NF Protocol
The daily practice of physicians in evaluating and treating patients with sNF.
Intervention Type
OTHER
ASTERIC protocol
i. Risk-assessment tools
Intervention Type
OTHER
ASTERIC protocol
ii. Fast track absolute neutrophil counts turnaround service
Intervention Type
OTHER
ASTERIC Protocol
iii. A decision tool for patient management and initial antibiotic use
Intervention Type
OTHER
ASTERIC Protocol
iv. A decision tool for patient management and subsequent antibiotic use
Intervention Type
OTHER
ASTERIC Protocol
v. An educational package
Intervention Type
OTHER
ASTERIC Protocol
vi. A decision tool for patient disposal - discharge or emergency department ward observation
Intervention Type
OTHER
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* ≥18 years
* Tympanic temperature ≥38.3ºC within 24 hours before ED registration
* Last chemotherapy or targeted therapy within 6 weeks for any solid tumour, or in any period following therapies against leukaemia, lymphoma, myelodysplastic syndrome, aplastic anaemia, multiple myeloma, or recipient of HSCT.
* Tympanic temperature ≥38.3ºC within 24 hours before ED registration
* Last chemotherapy or targeted therapy within 6 weeks for any solid tumour, or in any period following therapies against leukaemia, lymphoma, myelodysplastic syndrome, aplastic anaemia, multiple myeloma, or recipient of HSCT.
Exclusion Criteria
\- The decision on how far to apply or deviate from a protocol rests with the clinician. Patients would be excluded from follow up if were unable or unwilling to provide informed consent for data access
Minimum Eligible Age
18 Years
Eligible Sex
ALL
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
The University of Hong Kong
OTHER
Sponsor Role
lead
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Prof. Timothy Hudson RAINER
BSc (Hons), MBBCh, MRCP (UK), FHKCEM, FHKAM, MD, FRCEM, FRCP, FIFEM
Responsibility Role
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Professor RAINER Timothy Hudson, MBBCh
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
The University of Hong Kong
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
The University of Hong Kong
Hong Kong, , Hong Kong
Site Status
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Hong Kong
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
Timothy Hudson Professor Rainer, MBBCh
Role: primary
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Peyrony O, Gerlier C, Barla I, Ellouze S, Legay L, Azoulay E, Chevret S, Fontaine JP. Antibiotic prescribing and outcomes in cancer patients with febrile neutropenia in the emergency department. PLoS One. 2020 Feb 28;15(2):e0229828. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0229828. eCollection 2020.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Freifeld AG, Bow EJ, Sepkowitz KA, Boeckh MJ, Ito JI, Mullen CA, Raad II, Rolston KV, Young JA, Wingard JR; Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clinical practice guideline for the use of antimicrobial agents in neutropenic patients with cancer: 2010 update by the infectious diseases society of america. Clin Infect Dis. 2011 Feb 15;52(4):e56-93. doi: 10.1093/cid/cir073.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Zhu J, Zhou K, Jiang Y, Liu H, Bai H, Jiang J, Gao Y, Cai Q, Tong Y, Song X, Wang C, Wan L. Bacterial Pathogens Differed Between Neutropenic and Non-neutropenic Patients in the Same Hematological Ward: An 8-Year Survey. Clin Infect Dis. 2018 Nov 13;67(suppl_2):S174-S178. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciy643.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Ko HF, Tsui SS, Tse JW, Kwong WY, Chan OY, Wong GC. Improving the emergency department management of post-chemotherapy sepsis in haematological malignancy patients. Hong Kong Med J. 2015 Feb;21(1):10-5. doi: 10.12809/hkmj144280. Epub 2014 Oct 10.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Levy MM, Evans LE, Rhodes A. The Surviving Sepsis Campaign Bundle: 2018 Update. Crit Care Med. 2018 Jun;46(6):997-1000. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000003119. No abstract available.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Taplitz RA, Kennedy EB, Bow EJ, Crews J, Gleason C, Hawley DK, Langston AA, Nastoupil LJ, Rajotte M, Rolston K, Strasfeld L, Flowers CR. Outpatient Management of Fever and Neutropenia in Adults Treated for Malignancy: American Society of Clinical Oncology and Infectious Diseases Society of America Clinical Practice Guideline Update. J Clin Oncol. 2018 May 10;36(14):1443-1453. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2017.77.6211. Epub 2018 Feb 20.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Boxer L, Dale DC. Neutropenia: causes and consequences. Semin Hematol. 2002 Apr;39(2):75-81. doi: 10.1053/shem.2002.31911.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Pizzo PA, Robichaud KJ, Wesley R, Commers JR. Fever in the pediatric and young adult patient with cancer. A prospective study of 1001 episodes. Medicine (Baltimore). 1982 May;61(3):153-65. doi: 10.1097/00005792-198205000-00003. No abstract available.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Pasikhova Y, Ludlow S, Baluch A. Fever in Patients With Cancer. Cancer Control. 2017 Apr;24(2):193-197. doi: 10.1177/107327481702400212.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Kuderer NM, Dale DC, Crawford J, Cosler LE, Lyman GH. Mortality, morbidity, and cost associated with febrile neutropenia in adult cancer patients. Cancer. 2006 May 15;106(10):2258-66. doi: 10.1002/cncr.21847.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Caggiano V, Weiss RV, Rickert TS, Linde-Zwirble WT. Incidence, cost, and mortality of neutropenia hospitalization associated with chemotherapy. Cancer. 2005 May 1;103(9):1916-24. doi: 10.1002/cncr.20983.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Klastersky J, Ameye L, Maertens J, Georgala A, Muanza F, Aoun M, Ferrant A, Rapoport B, Rolston K, Paesmans M. Bacteraemia in febrile neutropenic cancer patients. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2007 Nov;30 Suppl 1:S51-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2007.06.012. Epub 2007 Aug 8.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Culakova E, Thota R, Poniewierski MS, Kuderer NM, Wogu AF, Dale DC, Crawford J, Lyman GH. Patterns of chemotherapy-associated toxicity and supportive care in US oncology practice: a nationwide prospective cohort study. Cancer Med. 2014 Apr;3(2):434-44. doi: 10.1002/cam4.200. Epub 2014 Feb 17.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Weycker D, Li X, Edelsberg J, Barron R, Kartashov A, Xu H, Lyman GH. Risk and Consequences of Chemotherapy-Induced Febrile Neutropenia in Patients With Metastatic Solid Tumors. J Oncol Pract. 2015 Jan;11(1):47-54. doi: 10.1200/JOP.2014.001492. Epub 2014 Dec 9.
Reference Type
BACKGROUND
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
21222361
Identifier Type: OTHER_GRANT
Identifier Source: secondary_id
ASTERIC
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.
Trial on the Ideal Duration of Oral Antibiotics in Children With Pneumonia
NCT02258763
COMPLETED
PHASE4
A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy Trial of Azithromycin SR Compared With Levofloxacin for the Treatment of Mild to Moderate Pneumonia in Adult Patients
NCT00643734
COMPLETED
PHASE3
Optimal Duration of Antimicrobial Susceptibility Test (AST) Guided Rescue Therapy for Helicobacter Pylori Infection
NCT02934048
UNKNOWN
PHASE4
An Open, Prospective, Randomized, Multicenter Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Intravenous Followed by Oral Azithromycin Versus Cefuroxime Alone or With Oral Erythromycin for the Treatment of Chinese Patients Who Were Hospitalized for Pneumonia
NCT00648726
COMPLETED
PHASE3
Drug Use Investigation Of Azithromycin IV For Pneumonia Or Pelvic Inflammatory Disease (Regulatory Post Marketing Commitment Plan)
NCT01671280
COMPLETED
A Trial Of Azithromycin SR For The Treatment Of Mild To Moderate Community Acquired Pneumonia In Japanese Adults
NCT00360295
COMPLETED
PHASE3
A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy Comparative Trial of Azithromycin Sustained Release Versus 3-Day Azithromycin for the Treatment of Strep Throat in Adolescents and Adults
NCT00644293
COMPLETED
PHASE3
A Single, High-Dose Azithromycin Extended Release (60 mg/kg) Compared With 10 Days of High-Dose Amoxicillin Clavulanate in Children With Ear Infections at High Risk of Persistent/Recurrent Ear Infections
NCT00643292
COMPLETED
PHASE3
Synergistic Effect of Plasmid Inhibitors and Antimicrobial Drugs Against Clinical MDR-hvKP
NCT05932355
UNKNOWN
A Trial Of Azithromycin SR For The Treatment Of Acute Bronchitis And Secondary Infection Of Chronic Respiratory Diseases
NCT00360464
COMPLETED
PHASE3
A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy Study Of Azithromycin SR Versus Amoxicillin For The Treatment Of Strep Throat In Children
NCT00643149
COMPLETED
PHASE3
Efficacy And Safety Of Azithromycin To Achieve Remissionin In Children With Steroid Sensitive Nephrotic Syndrome
NCT07320612
COMPLETED
PHASE1
The Efficacy of Azithromycin in Treating Children With Non Cystic Fibrosis Bronchiectasis
NCT02531984
UNKNOWN
PHASE3
A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy Trial of Azithromycin SR Compared With Levofloxacin for the Treatment of Sinus Infections in Adults
NCT00643409
COMPLETED
PHASE3
Meropenem vs Azithromycin Efficacy in Case XDR Enteric Fever
NCT07314281
RECRUITING
PHASE4
A Single and Repeat Dose PK/PD Study to Characterise Biomarker Response in Healthy Subjects Treated With Azithromycin
NCT01416350
COMPLETED
PHASE1
Intrapulmonary Pharmacokinetics of Antibiotics
NCT00315601
TERMINATED
PHASE4
The Anti-inflammatory Effect of Prophylactic Macrolides on Children With Chronic Lung Disease
NCT02544984
COMPLETED
NA
Intravenous Azithromycin Plus Intravenous Ceftriaxone Followed by Oral Azithromycin With Intravenous Levofloxacin Followed by Oral Levofloxacin for the Treatment of Moderate to Severely Ill Hospitalized Patients With Community Acquired Pneumonia
NCT00035347
COMPLETED
PHASE4
Hospitalised Pneumonia With Extended Treatment (HOPE) Study
NCT02783859
COMPLETED
PHASE4
PK Study of Single-Dose ZTI-01 in Children (<12 Years of Age)
NCT03709914
RECRUITING
PHASE1
Comparison of the Pharmacodynamics of Imipenem in Patients With Febrile Neutropenia
NCT02213783
COMPLETED
PHASE4
Azithromycin+Amoxicillin/Clavulanate vs Amoxicillin/Clavulanate in COVID19 Patients With Pneumonia in Non-intensive Unit
NCT04363060
UNKNOWN
PHASE3
Amoxicillin Versus Benzyl Penicillin for Treatment of Children Hospitalised With Severe Pneumonia
NCT01399723
COMPLETED
PHASE3
A Relative Bioavailability Study of 200mg/5 mL Azithromycin Oral Suspension Under Fasting Conditions
NCT00830206
COMPLETED
PHASE1