Topic
Neutropenia
About: Neutropenia is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 13786 publications have been published within this topic receiving 386289 citations. The topic is also known as: neutropaenia & neutropenic disorder.
Papers published on a yearly basis
1 / 2
Papers
University of Nebraska Medical Center1, University of Manitoba2, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center3, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center4, City of Hope National Medical Center5, University of Rochester6, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center7, University of Minnesota8, University of Florida9
TL;DR: This document updates and expands the initial Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) Fever and Neutropenia Guideline that was published in 1997 and first updated in 2002 and developed a clearer definition of which populations of patients with cancer may benefit most from antibiotic, antifungal, and antiviral prophylaxis.
Abstract: This document updates and expands the initial Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) Fever and Neutropenia Guideline that was published in 1997 and first updated in 2002. It is intended as a guide for the use of antimicrobial agents in managing patients with cancer who experience chemotherapy-induced fever and neutropenia. Recent advances in antimicrobial drug development and technology, clinical trial results, and extensive clinical experience have informed the approaches and recommendations herein. Because the previous iteration of this guideline in 2002, we have a developed a clearer definition of which populations of patients with cancer may benefit most from antibiotic, antifungal, and antiviral prophylaxis. Furthermore, categorizing neutropenic patients as being at high risk or low risk for infection according to presenting signs and symptoms, underlying cancer, type of therapy, and medical comorbidities has become essential to the treatment algorithm. Risk stratification is a recommended starting point for managing patients with fever and neutropenia. In addition, earlier detection of invasive fungal infections has led to debate regarding optimal use of empirical or preemptive antifungal therapy, although algorithms are still evolving. What has not changed is the indication for immediate empirical antibiotic therapy. It remains true that all patients who present with fever and neutropenia should be treated swiftly and broadly with antibiotics to treat both gram-positive and gram-negative pathogens. Finally, we note that all Panel members are from institutions in the United States or Canada; thus, these guidelines were developed in the context of North American practices. Some recommendations may not be as applicable outside of North America, in areas where differences in available antibiotics, in the predominant pathogens, and/or in health care-associated economic conditions exist. Regardless of venue, clinical vigilance and immediate treatment are the universal keys to managing neutropenic patients with fever and/or infection.
3,165 citations
TL;DR: CD19-CAR T cell therapy is feasible, safe, and mediates potent anti-leukaemic activity in children and young adults with chemotherapy-resistant B-precursor acute lymphoblastic leukaemia and non-Hodgkin lymphoma.
2,871 citations
University of Nebraska Medical Center1, University of Manitoba2, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center3, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center4, City of Hope National Medical Center5, University of Rochester6, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center7, University of Minnesota8, University of Florida9
TL;DR: This document updates and expands the initial Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) Fever and Neutropenia Guideline that was published in 1997 and first updated in 2002 and developed a clearer definition of which populations of patients with cancer may benefit most from antibiotic, antifungal, and antiviral prophylaxis.
Abstract: This document updates and expands the initial Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) Fever and Neutropenia Guideline that was published in 1997 and first updated in 2002. It is intended as a guide for the use of antimicrobial agents in managing patients with cancer who experience chemotherapy-induced fever and neutropenia. Recent advances in antimicrobial drug development and technology, clinical trial results, and extensive clinical experience have informed the approaches and recommendations herein. Because the previous iteration of this guideline in 2002, we have a developed a clearer definition of which populations of patients with cancer may benefit most from antibiotic, antifungal, and antiviral prophylaxis. Furthermore, categorizing neutropenic patients as being at high risk or low risk for infection according to presenting signs and symptoms, underlying cancer, type of therapy, and medical comorbidities has become essential to the treatment algorithm. Risk stratification is a recommended starting point for managing patients with fever and neutropenia. In addition, earlier detection of invasive fungal infections has led to debate regarding optimal use of empirical or preemptive antifungal therapy, although algorithms are still evolving. What has not changed is the indication for immediate empirical antibiotic therapy. It remains true that all patients who present with fever and neutropenia should be treated swiftly and broadly with antibiotics to treat both gram-positive and gram-negative pathogens. Finally, we note that all Panel members are from institutions in the United States or Canada; thus, these guidelines were developed in the context of North American practices. Some recommendations may not be as applicable outside of North America, in areas where differences in available antibiotics, in the predominant pathogens, and/or in health care-associated economic conditions exist. Regardless of venue, clinical vigilance and immediate treatment are the universal keys to managing neutropenic patients with fever and/or infection.
1,890 citations
Harvard University1, Washington University in St. Louis2, University of Arizona3, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center4, University of California, San Diego5, Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research6, Royal Melbourne Hospital7, AbbVie8, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center9, University of Melbourne10, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre11
TL;DR: Selective targeting of BCL2 with venetoclax had a manageable safety profile and induced substantial responses in patients with relapsed CLL or SLL, including those with poor prognostic features.
Abstract: BACKGROUND New treatments have improved outcomes for patients with relapsed chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), but complete remissions remain uncommon. Venetoclax has a distinct mechanism of action; it targets BCL2, a protein central to the survival of CLL cells. METHODS We conducted a phase 1 dose-escalation study of daily oral venetoclax in patients with relapsed or refractory CLL or small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) to assess safety, pharmacokinetic profile, and efficacy. In the dose-escalation phase, 56 patients received active treatment in one of eight dose groups that ranged from 150 to 1200 mg per day. In an expansion cohort, 60 additional patients were treated with a weekly stepwise ramp-up in doses as high as 400 mg per day. RESULTS The majority of the study patients had received multiple previous treatments, and 89% had poor prognostic clinical or genetic features. Venetoclax was active at all dose levels. Clinical tumor lysis syndrome occurred in 3 of 56 patients in the dose-escalation cohort, with one death. After adjustments to the dose-escalation schedule, clinical tumor lysis syndrome did not occur in any of the 60 patients in the expansion cohort. Other toxic effects in cluded mild diarrhea (in 52% of the patients), upper respiratory tract infection (in 48%), nausea (in 47%), and grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (in 41%). A maximum tolerated dose was not identified. Among the 116 patients who received venetoclax, 92 (79%) had a response. Response rates ranged from 71 to 79% among patients in subgroups with an adverse prognosis, including those with resistance to fludarabine, those with chromosome 17p deletions (deletion 17p CLL), and those with unmutated IGHV. Complete remissions occurred in 20% of the patients, including 5% who had no minimal residual disease on flow cytometry. The 15-month progression-free survival estimate for the 400-mg dose groups was 69%. CONCLUSIONS Selective targeting of BCL2 with venetoclax had a manageable safety profile and induced substantial responses in patients with relapsed CLL or SLL, including those with poor prognostic features. (Funded by AbbVie and Genentech; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01328626.)
1,787 citations
Harvard University1, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center2, Northwestern University3, University of Nebraska Medical Center4, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center5, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center6, University of Alabama at Birmingham7, University of Colorado Denver8, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center9, University of California, San Francisco10, University of Pittsburgh11, Northside Hospital12, Bristol-Myers Squibb13, City of Hope National Medical Center14
TL;DR: Overall safety and activity of liso-cel did not differ by dose level, with a high objective response rate, and a low incidence of grade 3 or worse cytokine release syndrome and neurological events in patients with relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphomas.
1,782 citations
Related Topics (5)
Performance Metrics
| Year | Papers |
|---|---|
| 2026 | 4 |
| 2025 | 300 |
| 2024 | 623 |
| 2023 | 1,309 |
| 2022 | 1,767 |
| 2021 | 500 |