PURPOSE: To update a clinical practice guideline (CPG) for the empiric management of fever and neutropenia (FN) in pediatric patients with cancer and hematopoietic cell transplantation recipients. METHODS: The International Pediatric Fever and Neutropenia Guideline Panel reconvened to conduct the second update of this CPG. We updated the previous systematic review to identify new randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating any strategy for the management of FN in pediatric patients. Using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework, evidence quality was classified as high, moderate, low, or very low. The panel updated recommendations related to initial management, ongoing management, and empiric antifungal therapy. Changes from the 2017 CPG were articulated, and good practice statements were considered. RESULTS: We identified 10 new RCTs in addition to the 69 RCTs identified in previous FN CPGs to inform the 2023 FN CPG. Changes from the 2017 CPG included two conditional recommendations regarding (1) discontinuation of empiric antibacterial therapy in clinically well and afebrile patients with low-risk FN if blood cultures remain negative at 48 hours despite no evidence of marrow recovery and (2) pre-emptive antifungal therapy for invasive fungal disease in high-risk patients not receiving antimold prophylaxis. The panel created a good practice statement to initiate FN CPG-consistent empiric antibacterial therapy as soon as possible in clinically unstable febrile patients. CONCLUSION: The updated FN CPG incorporates important modifications on the basis of recently published trials. Future work should focus on addressing knowledge gaps, improving CPG implementation, and measuring the impact of CPG-consistent care.

The primary objective was to describe the prevalence and characteristics of microbiologically defined infections and infection-related mortality (IRM) in 492 children with acute myeloid leukemia enrolled on CCG 2961. Secondary objectives were to determine the relationship between demographic, disease-related, and therapeutic variables, and infections and IRM. Institutions documented infections prospectively. Age, ethnicity, body mass index, leukemia karyotype, treatment, and institutional size were examined for association with infection outcomes. More than 60% of children experienced such infections in each of 3 phases of chemotherapy. There were 58 infectious deaths; cumulative incidence of IRM was 11% plus or minus 2%. Thirty-one percent of infectious deaths were associated with Aspergillus, 25.9% with Candida, and 15.5% with alpha hemolytic streptococci. Age older than 16 years (hazard ratio [HR], 3.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.87-5.89; P < .001), nonwhite ethnicity (HR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.10-3.09; P = .02), and underweight status (HR, 3.06; 95% CI, 1.51-6.22; P = .002) were associated with IRM, while size of the treating institution was not. Thus, age, ethnicity, and BMI were important contributors to IRM. Fungi and Gram-positive cocci were the most common organisms associated with IRM and, in particular, Aspergillus species was the largest contributor to infectious deaths.

Benefits of prophylactic hematopoietic colony-stimulating factors (CSFs) in adults and children receiving cancer chemotherapy or undergoing stem-cell transplantation (SCT) are unclear. To determine whether prophylactic CSFs decrease mortality, infections, and febrile neutropenia more than does placebo or no therapy in patients with cancer and in patients undergoing SCT. Electronic searches of Ovid MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception until April 2007 and of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials until the second quarter of 2006. We selected 148 trials that were reported in any language that randomly assigned patients to CSFs or to either placebo or no therapy. Prophylactic CSFs were given concurrently with or after initiation of chemotherapy. Two reviewers independently extracted data onto standardized forms. Short-term all-cause mortality appeared to be similar between the prophylactic CSF and the control groups (7.6% vs. 8.0%; relative risk, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.84 to 1.08]; absolute risk reduction, 0.4% [CI, −0.5% to 1.4%]). Risks for infection-related death with CSFs and placebo or no therapy were 3.1% and 3.8%, respectively (relative risk, 0.82 [CI, 0.66 to 1.02]; absolute risk reduction, 0.8% [CI, 0.0% to 1.5%]). Use of CSFs reduced the following more than did placebo or no therapy: documented infections (median rate, 38.9% vs. 43.1%; rate ratio, 0.85 [CI, 0.79 to 0.92]), microbiologically documented infections (median rate, 23.5% vs. 28.6%; rate ratio, 0.86 [CI, 0.77 to 0.96]), and episodes of febrile neutropenia (median rate, 25.3% vs. 44.2%; rate ratio, 0.71 [CI, 0.63 to 0.80]). Trial designs, including assessments of infections, and participants were heterogeneous. Estimates of mortality effects were imprecise. Prophylactic CSFs may have little or no effect on mortality but do decrease rates of infection in patients receiving cancer chemotherapy or those undergoing SCT.

PURPOSE: To develop a clinical practice guideline for systemic antifungal prophylaxis in pediatric patients with cancer and hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT) recipients. METHODS: Recommendations were developed by an international multidisciplinary panel that included a patient advocate. We conducted a systematic review of systemic antifungal prophylaxis in children and adults with cancer and HSCT recipients. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach was used to make strong or weak recommendations and to classify level of evidence as high, moderate, low, or very low. The panel considered directness of the data to pediatric patients. RESULTS: There were 68 randomized trials included in the systematic review, of which 6 (9%) were conducted in a solely pediatric population. Strong recommendations were made to administer systemic antifungal prophylaxis to children and adolescents receiving treatment of acute myeloid leukemia, to those undergoing allogeneic HSCT pre-engraftment, and to those receiving systemic immunosuppression for graft-versus-host disease treatment. A strong recommendation was made to administer a mold-active agent with an echinocandin or a mold-active azole when systemic antifungal prophylaxis is warranted. For children younger than 13 years of age, an echinocandin, voriconazole, or itraconazole is suggested. Posaconazole may also be used in those age 13 years or older. A strong recommendation against routine administration of amphotericin as systemic antifungal prophylaxis was made. CONCLUSION: We developed a clinical practice guideline for systemic antifungal prophylaxis administration in pediatric patients with cancer and HSCT recipients. Implementation and assessment of guideline-concordant rates and impacts are important future steps.