Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25887385›Full record

SynthesisBMC infectious diseases2015

Systematic review and mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials of primary oral antifungal prophylaxis in allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant recipients.

Eric J Bow, David J Vanness, Monica Slavin, Catherine Cordonnier, Oliver A Cornely, David I Marks, Antonio Pagliuca, Carlos Solano, Lael Cragin, Alissa J Shaul and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract readNetwork Meta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC infectious diseases, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Optimizing antifungal prophylaxis in allogeneic stem cell transplantation: A cohort study of two different approaches.Transplant infectious disease : an official journal of the Transplantation Society · 2022
    Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Guide for health professionals addressing oral care for individuals in oncological treatment based on scientific evidence.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2018
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 10 institutions in 7 countries.

Eric J BowCancerCare Manitoba, 675 McDermot Ave, Winnipeg, MB, Canada. EJBow@cancercare.mb.ca.
David J VannessUniversity of Wisconsin and Visiting Scientist at Evidera, Madison, Wisconsin, USA. dvanness@wisc.edu.
Monica SlavinRoyal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Australia. Monica.Slavin@mh.org.au.
Catherine CordonnierAssistance Publique-Hopitaux de Paris, Hôpital Henri Mondor and Université Paris-Est-Créteil, Creteil, France. carlcord@club-internet.fr.
Oliver A CornelyDepartment I of Internal Medicine, Clinical Trials Centre Cologne, ZKS Köln, BMBF 01KN1106, Center for Integrated Oncology CIO KölnBonn, Cologne Excellence Cluster on Cellular Stress Responses in Aging-Associated Diseases (CECAD), University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany. Oliver.Cornely@zks-koeln.de.
David I MarksUniversity Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol, UK. david.marks@uhbristol.nhs.uk.
Antonio PagliucaKing's College Hospital, London, UK. antonio.pagliuca@kcl.ac.uk.
Carlos SolanoHospital Clínico, INCLIVA Foundation, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain. solano_car@gva.es.
Lael CraginEvidera, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. lael.bilzor@verizon.net.
Alissa J ShaulEvidera, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. mendoza.alissa@gmail.com.
Sonja SorensenEvidera, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. Sonja.Sorensen@evidera.com.
Richard ChambersPfizer, Collegeville, Pennsylvania, USA. richard.chambers@pfizer.com.
Michal KanteckiPfizer, Paris, France. Michal.Kantecki@Pfizer.com.
David WeinsteinPfizer, Paris, France. douvedel@yahoo.fr.
Haran SchlammHTS Pharma Consulting, New York, New York, USA. HTSchlamm@att.net.
Ithaka Harbors · USPfizer (France) · FRCancerCare Manitoba · CAINCLIVA Health Research Institute · ESKing's College Hospital · GBPfizer (United States) · USThe Royal Melbourne Hospital · AUUniversité Paris-Est Créteil · FRUniversity Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust · GBUniversity of Cologne · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAntifungal prophylaxis is a promising strategy for reducing invasive fungal infections (IFIs) in allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (alloHCT) recipients, but the optimum prophylactic agent is unknown. We used mixed treatment comparison (MTC) meta-analysis to compare clinical trials examining the use of oral antifungals for prophylaxis in alloHCT recipients, with the goal of informing medical decision-making.

methodsRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) of fluconazole, itraconazole, posaconazole, and voriconazole for primary antifungal prophylaxis were identified through a systematic literature review. Outcomes of interest (incidence of IFI/invasive aspergillosis/invasive candidiasis, all-cause mortality, and use of other antifungals) were extracted from eligible RCTs and incorporated into a Bayesian hierarchical random-effects MTC.

resultsFive eligible RCTs, randomizing 2147 patients in total, were included. Relative to fluconazole, prophylaxis with itraconazole (odds ratio [OR]: 0.52; interquartile range [IQR]: 0.35-0.76), posaconazole (OR: 0.56; IQR: 0.32-0.99), and voriconazole (OR: 0.46; IQR: 0.28-0.73) reduced incidence of overall proven/probable IFI. Posaconazole (OR: 0.31; IQR: 0.17-0.58) and voriconazole (OR: 0.33; IQR: 0.17-0.58) prophylaxis reduced proven/probable invasive aspergillosis more than itraconazole (OR: 0.68; IQR: 0.42-1.12). All-cause mortality was similar across all mould-active agents.

conclusionAs expected, mould-active azoles prevented IFIs, particularly invasive aspergillosis, more effectively than fluconazole in alloHCT recipients. The paucity of comparative efficacy data suggests that other factors such as long-term tolerability, availability of intravenous formulations, local IFI epidemiology, and drug costs may need to form the basis for selection among the mould-active azoles.

Indexed as

Antifungal AgentsHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationMycosesBayes TheoremHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTransplant RecipientsAntifungal Agents

Identifiers

PMID25887385
PMCPMC4374298
OpenAlexW2042257719

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.