A New Ciprofloxacin Stepdown Program in the Treatment of High‐Risk Febrile Neutropenia: A Clinical and Economic Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine treatment outcomes and economic impact of a ciprofloxacin stepdown program for high-risk febrile neutropenic adults from the hospital's perspective. DESIGN: Unblinded, two-phase, single-center study. SETTING: Adult leukemia and stem cell transplant unit. PATIENTS: High-risk adults with febrile neutropenia. INTERVENTION: Two conditions were analyzed: a multidisciplinary ciprofloxacin stepdown program involving a reduction in parenteral ciprofloxacin dose from 400 to 200 mg (i.v.-i.v.) and conversion to oral ciprofloxacin (i.v.-p.o.) when criteria were met; and no i.v.-i.v. stepdown program. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Forty-six sequential treatment courses were compared with 42 treatment course from 6-month periods in preintervention (P1) and postintervention (P2) phases. Assessed parameters were clinical and microbiologic outcomes, adverse drug reactions (ADRs), and direct medical resource use and costs (1998 $Canadian) for the episode of febrile neutropenia. A decision analytic model was used to map probabilities and costs and to conduct sensitivity analyses. To supplement standard statistical testing, 1,000 bootstrap samples were created, and the mean cost difference was calculated between phases for each sample. Patient demographics, percentage i.v.-p.o. stepdown, and duration of therapy were similar between phases. Clinical success (83% P1, 81% P2), microbiologic eradication (15% P1, 24% P2), and possible ADRs (6% P1, 9% P2) did not differ. Intravenous-to-intravenous dose stepdown occurred in 33% of P2 and no P1 treatment courses (p<0.001). Resource use and costs were similar between phases, although a reduction was seen in the drug's mean total cost/day ($58 P1, $52 P2, p=0.04). There was also a trend toward a decrease in mean total treatment costs ($4,843 P1, $3,493 P2, p=0.08). In 1,000 bootstrap samples, 99.8% showed a cost advantage for P2. The model was robust to sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: This intervention influenced administration of ciprofloxacin without apparent compromise of patient outcomes and resulted in a reduction in total costs of treating febrile neutropenia.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".