Cefoperazone-sulbactam plus amikacin empirical therapy for febrile neutropenia in children with cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: To determine the efficacy and safety of cefoperazone-sulbactam combined with amikacin in the treatment of febrile neutropenia in children with cancer. Materials and Methods: The study included 20 cancer cases with 26 febrile neutropenia (FEN) episodes. Patient selection criteria were defined according to the guidelines issued by the Infectious Disease Society of America (IDSA). Results: Patients diagnosed with acute leukemia (58%) and solid tumors (42%) were recorded. Twelve (46.2%) of the primary disease cases were refractory. The number of infection episodes identified microbiologically and clinically was 10 (38.5%) and 12 (46.1%), respectively. Fever of unknown origin was observed in only 4 cases (15.4%). The success rate of the empirical treatment without additional modification was 42.3% (11 FEN episodes). Four episodes (15.4%) needed a replacement for sulbactam/cefoperazone because of persistent fever, adverse reactions, and/or clinical deterioration. Three patients died because of relapse or because they were refractory. As 15 (57.7%) of the patients deteriorated clinically and had fever, glycopeptide antibiotics were given after 48-72 h. The overall response rate at the end of the therapy was 80.8%, with/without modification. Conclusions: The combination of sulbactam/cefoperazone plus amikacin was effective and safe in the treatment of febrile episodes in neutropenic pediatric cancer patients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".