Cochrane · systematic review · CD003038
Beta‐lactam versus beta‐lactam‐aminoglycoside combination therapy in cancer patients with neutropenia
Paul, M, Dickstein, Y, Schlesinger, A, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2013 · Cochrane Library
Gynaecological, Neuro-oncology and Orphan CancerAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
4
current version
GRADE rated
4
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 0 · 0%Low 1 · 25%Moderate 1 · 25%High 2 · 50%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
beta‐lactam monotherapy compared to beta‐lactam‐aminoglycoside combination therapy for Febrile neutropenic cancer patients
Population: febrile neutropenic cancer patients.
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
All cause mortality beta‐lactam monotherapy vs beta‐lactam‐aminoglycoside combination therapy | RR 0.87 [0.75, 1.02] | 44 studies · 7186 participants | High |
Any nephrotoxicity ‐ Ag dosing regimen (Copy) beta‐lactam monotherapy vs beta‐lactam‐aminoglycoside combination therapy | RR 0.45 [0.35, 0.57] | 39 studies · 6608 participants | High |
Treatment failure ‐ same beta‐lactam beta‐lactam monotherapy vs beta‐lactam‐aminoglycoside combination therapy | RR 1.11 [1.02, 1.2] | 16 studies · 2833 participants | Moderate |
Treatment failure ‐ different beta‐lactam beta‐lactam monotherapy vs beta‐lactam‐aminoglycoside combination therapy | RR 0.92 [0.88, 0.97] | 55 studies · 7736 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |