Efficacy and safety of cefoperazone-sulbactam in empiric therapy for febrile neutropenia: A systemic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE: This meta-analysis assessed the clinical efficacy and safety of cefoperazone-sulbactam for empiric therapy febrile neutropenia. METHODS: The PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCO, Cochrane Library, Ovid Medline, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrial.gov database were searched through May 10, 2019. Only clinical trials comparing cefoperazone-sulbactam with other antibiotics for empiric treatment of febrile neutropenia were included. The primary outcome was treatment success without modification, and the secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality and adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Ten randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 1 retrospective cohort study were included. Overall, cefoperazone-sulbactam exhibited a treatment success rate similar to those of comparator drugs for the treatment of febrile neutropenia (odds ratio [OR], 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.24, I(2) = 0%). A similar finding was noted in pooled analysis of 10 RCTs (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.30, I(2) = 0%). Subgroup analysis showed that cefoperazone-sulbactam had a treatment success rate similar to the rates of comparators for adults (OR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.38, I(2) = 0%) and children (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.46, I(2) = 0%). Cefoperazone-sulbactam did not differ significantly from comparators in the risks of all-cause mortality (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.58 to 1.58, I(2) = 0%) or common AEs, namely rash, nausea/vomiting, and superinfection. CONCLUSION: The clinical efficacy and tolerability of cefoperazone-sulbactam are comparable to those of comparator drugs in the treatment of febrile neutropenia.