TY - JOUR
T1 - Clinical impact of fluoroquinolone-resistant Escherichia coli in the fecal flora of hematological patients with neutropenia and levofloxacin prophylaxis
AU - Chong, Yong
AU - Shimoda, Shinji
AU - Yakushiji, Hiroko
AU - Ito, Yoshikiyo
AU - Aoki, Takatoshi
AU - Miyamoto, Toshihiro
AU - Kamimura, Tomohiko
AU - Shimono, Nobuyuki
AU - Akashi, Koichi
PY - 2014/1/22
Y1 - 2014/1/22
N2 - Background: Fluoroquinolone prophylaxis in patients with neutropenia and hematological malignancies is said to be effective on febrile netropenia (FN)-related infection and mortality; however, the emergence of antibiotic resistance has become a concern. Ciprofloxacin and levofloxacin prophylaxis are most commonly recommended. A significant increase in the rate of quinolone-resistant Escherichia coli in fecal flora has been reported following ciprofloxacin prophylaxis. The acquisition of quinolone-resistant E. coli after levofloxacin use has not been evaluated. Methods: We prospectively examined the incidence of quinolone-resistant E. coli isolates recovered from stool cultures before and after levofloxacin prophylaxis in patients with neutropenia from August 2011 to May 2013. Some patients received chemotherapy multiple times. Results: In this trial, 68 patients were registered. Levofloxacin-resistant E. coli isolates were detected from 11 and 13 of all patients before and after the prophylaxis, respectively. However, this was not statistically significant ( P= 0.65). Multiple prophylaxis for sequential chemotherapy did not induce additional quinolone resistance among E. coli isolates. Interestingly, quinolone-resistant E. coli, most of which were extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL) producers, were already detected in approximately 20% of all patients before the initiation of prophylaxis. FN-related bacteremia developed in 2 patients, accompanied by a good prognosis. Conclusions: Levofloxacin prophylaxis for neutropenia did not result in a significant acquisition of quinolone-resistant E. coli. However, we detected previous colonization of quinolone-resistant E. coli before prophylaxis, which possibly reflects the spread of ESBL. The epidemic spread of resistant E. coli as a local factor may influence strategies toward the use of quinolone prophylaxis.
AB - Background: Fluoroquinolone prophylaxis in patients with neutropenia and hematological malignancies is said to be effective on febrile netropenia (FN)-related infection and mortality; however, the emergence of antibiotic resistance has become a concern. Ciprofloxacin and levofloxacin prophylaxis are most commonly recommended. A significant increase in the rate of quinolone-resistant Escherichia coli in fecal flora has been reported following ciprofloxacin prophylaxis. The acquisition of quinolone-resistant E. coli after levofloxacin use has not been evaluated. Methods: We prospectively examined the incidence of quinolone-resistant E. coli isolates recovered from stool cultures before and after levofloxacin prophylaxis in patients with neutropenia from August 2011 to May 2013. Some patients received chemotherapy multiple times. Results: In this trial, 68 patients were registered. Levofloxacin-resistant E. coli isolates were detected from 11 and 13 of all patients before and after the prophylaxis, respectively. However, this was not statistically significant ( P= 0.65). Multiple prophylaxis for sequential chemotherapy did not induce additional quinolone resistance among E. coli isolates. Interestingly, quinolone-resistant E. coli, most of which were extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL) producers, were already detected in approximately 20% of all patients before the initiation of prophylaxis. FN-related bacteremia developed in 2 patients, accompanied by a good prognosis. Conclusions: Levofloxacin prophylaxis for neutropenia did not result in a significant acquisition of quinolone-resistant E. coli. However, we detected previous colonization of quinolone-resistant E. coli before prophylaxis, which possibly reflects the spread of ESBL. The epidemic spread of resistant E. coli as a local factor may influence strategies toward the use of quinolone prophylaxis.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84899787806&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84899787806&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0085210
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0085210
M3 - Article
C2 - 24465506
AN - SCOPUS:84899787806
SN - 1932-6203
VL - 9
JO - PloS one
JF - PloS one
IS - 1
M1 - e85210
ER -