Back

Empirical antibacterial use, escalation, microbiological profile, and outcomes in febrile neutropenia: An ambispective observational study

Trivedi, S. G.; Singh, S. K.; Pramanik, S. K.

2026-09-23 hematology
10.64898/2026.09.22.26363666 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundFebrile neutropenia requires rapid empirical antibiotic therapy, with regimen selection shaped by local prescribing practice and pathogen patterns. We described starting treatment, later drug changes, microbiological findings, and inpatient outcomes. MethodsThis ambispective cohort comprised 96 episodes from 90 patients admitted to a tertiary-level teaching hospital. Treatment and outcome analyses used each episode as the unit of observation. Recorded variables included the starting antibiotics, later regimen modification, microbiology, hospitalization length, invasive fungal infection (IFI) as captured in study records, and disposition. Comparisons based on escalation status were exploratory. ResultCefoperazone-sulbactam appeared in 62/96 initial regimens (64.6%), amikacin in 42 (43.8%), teicoplanin in 28 (29.2%), and meropenem in 14 (14.6%). Eighteen episodes (18.8%) required a change that broadened or substituted antibacterial therapy. Among 31 microbiologically documented infections, 22 (71.0%) yielded Gram-negative organisms and 9 (29.0%) were polymicrobial. Median length of admission was 18.5 days in the escalation group and 9 days in the remainder (p<0.001). Mortality was 27.8% (5/18) with escalation and 5.1% (4/78) without it (p=0.011), with nine inhospital deaths overall (9.4%). ConclusionAntibacterial management differed within this cohort, with treatment escalation required in 18 of 96 episodes. Gram-negative organisms comprised most microbiologically confirmed infections. Escalation marked a clinically complex course with prolonged hospitalization and greater observed mortality; the observational design does not establish comparative efficacy or causation.

Matching journals

The top 11 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.