Efficacy of Posaconazole for Primary Prophylaxis in the Induction Therapy of Childhood Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia.
10.19746/j.cnki.issn.1009-2137.2021.06.003
- Author:
Ya-Ting ZHANG
1
;
Jian WANG
1
;
Dun-Hua ZHOU
1
;
Jian-Pei FANG
2
Author Information
1. Department of Pediatrics, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510120, Guangdong Province, China.
2. Department of Pediatrics, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou 510120, Guangdong Province, China,E-mail: jpfang2005@163.com.
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- MeSH:
Antifungal Agents/therapeutic use*;
Child;
Humans;
Induction Chemotherapy;
Mycoses/drug therapy*;
Precursor Cell Lymphoblastic Leukemia-Lymphoma/drug therapy*;
Primary Prevention;
Triazoles
- From:
Journal of Experimental Hematology
2021;29(6):1710-1713
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE:To explore the effect of posaconazole in the primary prevention of invasive fungal disease (IFD) in the induction therapy of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL).
METHODS:From August 2018 to November 2020, 144 pediatric patients with ALL treated in Department of Pediatrics, Sun Yat-Sen Memorial Hospital, Sun Yat-Sen University were selected, 88 cases received fluconazole as IFD prophylaxis (fluconazole prophylaxis group), 56 cases received posaconazole as IFD prophylaxis (posaconazole prophylaxis group). The incidence of IFD and treatment-related adverse reactions between the two groups were compared, and the safety of posaconazole was evaluated.
RESULTS:The incidence of IFD in the fluconazole prophylaxis group was 20.4% (18/88), and in the posaconazole prophylaxis group was 7.1% (4/56). The incidence of IFD between the two groups was statistically significant different(P=0.030). There was no serious adverse reactions in the two groups. The incidence of mild adverse reactions in the posaconazole prophylaxis group (23.2%) was lower than that in the fluconazole prophylaxis group(39.8%), and the difference was statistically significant (P=0.039). There were 12 cases died in the fluconazole prophylaxis group and 4 in the posaconazole prophylaxis group, while no significant difference in the overall survival rate between the two groups (P=0.281).
CONCLUSION:The effect of posaconazole in the primary prophylaxis of IFD is better and incidence of adverse reactions is lower than fluconazole. Posaconazole can be tolerated, and expected to become the first-line primary prophylaxis drug for IFD during the induction remission therapy of childhood ALL.
