PubMed:23403504 JSONTXT

{"project":"Allie","denotations":[{"id":"SS1_23403504_2_0","span":{"begin":236,"end":264},"obj":"expanded"},{"id":"SS2_23403504_2_0","span":{"begin":266,"end":269},"obj":"abbr"}],"relations":[{"id":"AE1_23403504_2_0","pred":"abbreviatedTo","subj":"SS1_23403504_2_0","obj":"SS2_23403504_2_0"}],"text":"Randomized double blind trial of ciprofloxacin prophylaxis during induction treatment in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia in the WK-ALL protocol in Indonesia.\nOBJECTIVES: Toxic death is a big problem in the treatment of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), especially in low-income countries. Studies of ciprofloxacin as single agent prophylaxis vary widely in success rate. We conducted a double-blind, randomized study to test the effects of ciprofloxacin monotherapy as prophylaxis for sepsis and death in induction treatment of the Indonesian childhood ALL protocol.\nMETHODS: Patients were randomized to the ciprofloxacin arm (n = 58) and to the placebo arm (n = 52). Oral ciprofloxacin monotherapy or oral placebo was administered twice a day. All events during induction were recorded: toxic death, abandonment, resistant disease, and complete remission rate.\nRESULTS: Of 110 patients enrolled in this study, 79 (71.8%) achieved CR. In comparison to the placebo arm, the ciprofloxacin arm had lower nadir of absolute neutrophil count during induction with median of 62 (range: 5-884) versus 270 (range: 14-25,480) × 10(9) cells/L (P \u003c 0.01), greater risks for experiencing fever (50.0% versus 32.7%, P = 0.07), clinical sepsis (50.0% versus 38.5%, P = 0.22), and death (18.9% versus 5.8%, P = 0.05).\nCONCLUSION: In our setting, a reduced intensity protocol in a low-income situation, the data warn against using ciprofloxacin prophylaxis during induction treatment. A lower nadir of neutrophil count and higher mortality were found in the ciprofloxacin group."}

{"project":"PubmedHPO","denotations":[{"id":"T1","span":{"begin":236,"end":264},"obj":"HP_0006721"},{"id":"T2","span":{"begin":256,"end":264},"obj":"HP_0001909"},{"id":"T3","span":{"begin":412,"end":417},"obj":"HP_0000618"},{"id":"T4","span":{"begin":504,"end":510},"obj":"HP_0100806"}],"text":"Randomized double blind trial of ciprofloxacin prophylaxis during induction treatment in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia in the WK-ALL protocol in Indonesia.\nOBJECTIVES: Toxic death is a big problem in the treatment of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), especially in low-income countries. Studies of ciprofloxacin as single agent prophylaxis vary widely in success rate. We conducted a double-blind, randomized study to test the effects of ciprofloxacin monotherapy as prophylaxis for sepsis and death in induction treatment of the Indonesian childhood ALL protocol.\nMETHODS: Patients were randomized to the ciprofloxacin arm (n = 58) and to the placebo arm (n = 52). Oral ciprofloxacin monotherapy or oral placebo was administered twice a day. All events during induction were recorded: toxic death, abandonment, resistant disease, and complete remission rate.\nRESULTS: Of 110 patients enrolled in this study, 79 (71.8%) achieved CR. In comparison to the placebo arm, the ciprofloxacin arm had lower nadir of absolute neutrophil count during induction with median of 62 (range: 5-884) versus 270 (range: 14-25,480) × 10(9) cells/L (P \u003c 0.01), greater risks for experiencing fever (50.0% versus 32.7%, P = 0.07), clinical sepsis (50.0% versus 38.5%, P = 0.22), and death (18.9% versus 5.8%, P = 0.05).\nCONCLUSION: In our setting, a reduced intensity protocol in a low-income situation, the data warn against using ciprofloxacin prophylaxis during induction treatment. A lower nadir of neutrophil count and higher mortality were found in the ciprofloxacin group."}

{"project":"Linmchun_800_3","denotations":[{"id":"T1","span":{"begin":627,"end":640},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T2","span":{"begin":665,"end":672},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T3","span":{"begin":692,"end":705},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T4","span":{"begin":33,"end":46},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T5","span":{"begin":319,"end":332},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T6","span":{"begin":459,"end":472},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T7","span":{"begin":992,"end":1005},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T8","span":{"begin":1433,"end":1446},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T9","span":{"begin":1560,"end":1573},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T10","span":{"begin":266,"end":269},"obj":"DP"},{"id":"T11","span":{"begin":236,"end":264},"obj":"DP"},{"id":"T12","span":{"begin":99,"end":127},"obj":"DP"},{"id":"T13","span":{"begin":572,"end":575},"obj":"DP"},{"id":"T14","span":{"begin":726,"end":733},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T15","span":{"begin":975,"end":982},"obj":"CI"}],"text":"Randomized double blind trial of ciprofloxacin prophylaxis during induction treatment in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia in the WK-ALL protocol in Indonesia.\nOBJECTIVES: Toxic death is a big problem in the treatment of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), especially in low-income countries. Studies of ciprofloxacin as single agent prophylaxis vary widely in success rate. We conducted a double-blind, randomized study to test the effects of ciprofloxacin monotherapy as prophylaxis for sepsis and death in induction treatment of the Indonesian childhood ALL protocol.\nMETHODS: Patients were randomized to the ciprofloxacin arm (n = 58) and to the placebo arm (n = 52). Oral ciprofloxacin monotherapy or oral placebo was administered twice a day. All events during induction were recorded: toxic death, abandonment, resistant disease, and complete remission rate.\nRESULTS: Of 110 patients enrolled in this study, 79 (71.8%) achieved CR. In comparison to the placebo arm, the ciprofloxacin arm had lower nadir of absolute neutrophil count during induction with median of 62 (range: 5-884) versus 270 (range: 14-25,480) × 10(9) cells/L (P \u003c 0.01), greater risks for experiencing fever (50.0% versus 32.7%, P = 0.07), clinical sepsis (50.0% versus 38.5%, P = 0.22), and death (18.9% versus 5.8%, P = 0.05).\nCONCLUSION: In our setting, a reduced intensity protocol in a low-income situation, the data warn against using ciprofloxacin prophylaxis during induction treatment. A lower nadir of neutrophil count and higher mortality were found in the ciprofloxacin group."}

{"project":"luoyt2021_800_3","denotations":[{"id":"T1","span":{"begin":99,"end":127},"obj":"DP"},{"id":"T10","span":{"begin":992,"end":1005},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T11","span":{"begin":692,"end":705},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T12","span":{"begin":627,"end":640},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T13","span":{"begin":459,"end":472},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T14","span":{"begin":319,"end":332},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T4","span":{"begin":266,"end":269},"obj":"DP"},{"id":"T5","span":{"begin":236,"end":264},"obj":"DP"},{"id":"T6","span":{"begin":572,"end":575},"obj":"DP"},{"id":"T7","span":{"begin":33,"end":46},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T8","span":{"begin":1560,"end":1573},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T9","span":{"begin":1433,"end":1446},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T15","span":{"begin":975,"end":982},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T16","span":{"begin":665,"end":672},"obj":"CI"},{"id":"T17","span":{"begin":726,"end":733},"obj":"CI"}],"text":"Randomized double blind trial of ciprofloxacin prophylaxis during induction treatment in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia in the WK-ALL protocol in Indonesia.\nOBJECTIVES: Toxic death is a big problem in the treatment of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), especially in low-income countries. Studies of ciprofloxacin as single agent prophylaxis vary widely in success rate. We conducted a double-blind, randomized study to test the effects of ciprofloxacin monotherapy as prophylaxis for sepsis and death in induction treatment of the Indonesian childhood ALL protocol.\nMETHODS: Patients were randomized to the ciprofloxacin arm (n = 58) and to the placebo arm (n = 52). Oral ciprofloxacin monotherapy or oral placebo was administered twice a day. All events during induction were recorded: toxic death, abandonment, resistant disease, and complete remission rate.\nRESULTS: Of 110 patients enrolled in this study, 79 (71.8%) achieved CR. In comparison to the placebo arm, the ciprofloxacin arm had lower nadir of absolute neutrophil count during induction with median of 62 (range: 5-884) versus 270 (range: 14-25,480) × 10(9) cells/L (P \u003c 0.01), greater risks for experiencing fever (50.0% versus 32.7%, P = 0.07), clinical sepsis (50.0% versus 38.5%, P = 0.22), and death (18.9% versus 5.8%, P = 0.05).\nCONCLUSION: In our setting, a reduced intensity protocol in a low-income situation, the data warn against using ciprofloxacin prophylaxis during induction treatment. A lower nadir of neutrophil count and higher mortality were found in the ciprofloxacin group."}