Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

  • Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Bacterial profile and antimicrobial susceptibility patterns in cancer patients

  • Minichil Worku ,

    Contributed equally to this work with: Minichil Worku, Gizeaddis Belay, Abiye Tigabu

    Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft

    Affiliation Department of Medical Microbiology, School of Biomedical and Laboratory Sciences, University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia

    ⨯
  • Gizeaddis Belay ,

    Contributed equally to this work with: Minichil Worku, Gizeaddis Belay, Abiye Tigabu

    Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Software, Writing – original draft

    Affiliation Department of Medical Microbiology, School of Biomedical and Laboratory Sciences, University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia

    ⨯
  • Abiye Tigabu

    Contributed equally to this work with: Minichil Worku, Gizeaddis Belay, Abiye Tigabu

    Roles Data curation, Methodology, Validation, Visualization, Writing – review & editing

    abty12@gmail.com

    Affiliation Department of Medical Microbiology, School of Biomedical and Laboratory Sciences, University of Gondar, Gondar, Ethiopia

    ⨯

Abstract

Background

Bloodstream infections have been the leading complications in cancer patients because they are at high risk for antibiotic-resistant bacterial infections. There is increasing evidence from different parts of the world of the high prevalence of antimicrobial-resistant bacterial strains in cancer patients. The burden of the infection is high in developing countries, especially in Ethiopia. Data on bacterial profile and antimicrobial susceptibility patterns among cancer patients in Ethiopia is limited. Thus, this study aimed to determine the predominant bacterial species causing bacteremia and their antibiotic resistance pattern among cancer patients at University of Gondar comprehensive specialized hospital.

Methods

A hospital-based, cross-sectional study was conducted on 200 study participants from March to July 2021. All cancer patients who developed a fever at the time of hospital visit were included in this study, and their socio-demographic and clinical data were collected using a structured questionnaire. Blood samples (10 mL for adults and 4 mL for children) were collected from each patient, and the collected blood samples were transferred into sterile tryptic soy broth, then incubated at 37°C for 7 days. Tryptic soy broth which showed signs of growth were Gram-stained and sub-cultured on blood agar, chocolate agar, MacConkey agar, and mannitol salt agar. The inoculated plates were then aerobically incubated at 37°C for 18–24 hours and the isolates obtained were identified using standard microbiological methods. Antimicrobial susceptibility tests were done using a modified Kirby-Bauer disk diffusion technique following CLSI 2021 guidelines. Data were entered using EPI data version 4.6 and analyzed with SPSS version 20.

Results

In this study, out of 200 cancer patients included and 67.5% (135/200) of them were males. The majorities of study participants, 56% (113/200) of cancer patients were pediatrics and 26.5% (53/200) of them belong under five years of age. Out of 200 patient samples that had undergone culture, 27% (54/200) samples had bacterial growth. Gram-positive bacterial isolates were predominant, 61.1%, and S. aureus was the predominant Gram-positive isolate, (51.5.6%), followed by coagulase-negative staphylococci (48.5%). Moreover, K. pneumoniae (47%) and P. aeruginosa (29.5%) were the most common Gram-negative bacterial isolates. Among patients who had BSIs, the highest prevalence of BSIs was observed among males (66.7%), and in pediatrics cancer patients (44.2%). Pediatric study participants were more venerable to bloodstream infection (P = 0.000) compared to adult participants. Meropenem (100%), amikacin (100%), piperacillin/tazobactam (72.3%), and ceftazidime (73.5%) were effective against for Gram-negative isolates while cefoxitin (81.2%) and penicillin (70.5%) were effective for Gram-positive isolates. Additionally, most Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacterial isolates were sensitive for gentamycin (75.9%). Multidrug resistance was seen among 17.1% bacterial isolates, and MDR in Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria were 83.3% and 16.7%, respectively. Gram-negative bacterial isolates showed a high prevalence of MDR than Gram-positive isolates.

Conclusions and recommendation

BSI’s remains an important health problem in cancer patients, and Gram-positive bacteria were more common as etiologic agents of BSIs in cancer patients. S. aureus was the dominant bacteria followed by CoNS, K. pneumoniae, and P. aeruginosa. Multidrug-resistant isolates found in cancer patients and routine bacterial surveillance and study of their resistance patterns may guide successful antimicrobial therapy and improve the quality of care. Therefore, strict regulation of antibiotic stewardship and infection control programs should be considered in the study area.

Citation: Worku M, Belay G, Tigabu A (2022) Bacterial profile and antimicrobial susceptibility patterns in cancer patients. PLoS ONE 17(4): e0266919. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266919

Editor: Abdelazeem Mohamed Algammal, Suez Canal University, EGYPT

Received: December 3, 2021; Accepted: March 29, 2022; Published: April 15, 2022

Copyright: © 2022 Worku et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: All relevant data are within the manuscript and its supporting information files.

Funding: The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Abbreviations: ATCC, American type culture collection; BSI, Blood stream infection; CLSI, Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute; CoNS, Coagulase negative staphylococci; GPB, Gram positive bacteria; GNB, Gram negative bacteria; MHA, Muller Hinton Agar; MDR, Multidrug-Resistant; UoGCSH, University of Gondar Comprehensive Specialized Hospital

Background

Oncology patients on chemotherapy are at particular risk for bacterial, and fungal infections and bloodstream infection remains the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing treatment for cancer which causes life-threatening complications and a significantly elevated risk of infection-related death [1–3]. More than half of all cancer cases and about 60% of deaths occur in developing countries [4, 5]. Infection-related mortality affects the survival rates of patients who are receiving treatment for cancer [6].

Blood-stream infections in oncology patients become a growing problem in sub-Saharan African countries due to immunodeficiencies, immunosuppressive anticancer chemotherapy, and frequent interaction with health care settings for treatment [7]. Neutropenia, emerging advanced life-support facilities, altered gut flora, disruption of skin, and damage of epithelial surfaces increase the susceptibility of cancer patients to infection [8]. Neutropenia is an important risk factor associated with BSIs in up to 25% of cancer patients, with death rates as high as 24% in high-income countries and 33% in low-middle income countries [9–11].

Moreover, BSI’s represents about 15% of all nosocomial infections, and infections emerged in cancer patients cause a disorder of the treatment pattern, hospital stay, and an increase in treatment cost as well as a reduced survival rate in patients [8, 12–15]. Bacterial BSIs and antimicrobial resistance frequently result in treatment failure and prolonged infections in cancer patients [16–18]. The most common bacterial isolates from patients with cancer were S. aureus, A. baumannii, K. pneumoniae, P. aeruginosa, and E. coli [1–3]. S. aureus is one of the major pathogens of humans causes various suppurative diseases, food poisoning, pneumonia, sepsis, and toxic shock syndrome by producing many virulence factors, including toxins (α-toxin, β-toxin, δ-toxin, P-V Leukocidin, enterotoxin, exfoliative toxin, and toxic shock syndrome toxin), enzymes (coagulase, proteases, lipase, hyaluronidase, staphylokinase, and nuclease), antigens (capsule, protein A, fibrin binding protein, and adhesins), immune-modulatory factors, and iron acquisition factors [19–21].

K. pneumoniae is one of the leading causes of neonatal sepsis and the most common cause of bacteremia, pneumonia, liver abscess, meningitis, wound infections, purulent abscesses, urinary tract infection, and endophthalmitis. Capsule, mucoid phenotype, iron acquisition systems, and beta-lactamases production are important determinants for virulence of K. pneumoniae [22–24]. Additionally, P. aeruginosa is an increasingly prevalent opportunistic pathogen and responsible for severe life-threatening nosocomial infections such as nosocomial pneumonia cases, hospital-acquired urinary tract infections, surgical wound infections, and bloodstream infections. P. aeruginosa possesses cell-associated (flagella, pili, lectins, alginate/biofilm, lipopolysaccharide) and extracellular (proteases, hemolysins, cytotoxin, pyocyanin, siderophores, exotoxin A, exoenzyme S, exoenzyme U, motility) virulence factors [25–27].

The World Health Organization (WHO) has identified antimicrobial resistance as one of the greatest threats to human health, and it becomes challenging in immunocompromised cancer patients [28, 29]. One of the main concerns in BSIs is the development of multi-drug resistance which is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality, especially in hospitalized patients [1]. Frequent and irrational use of antibiotics and prolonged hospital stays lead to a high prevalence of antimicrobial resistance in cancer patients, which calls urgent measures to optimize the application of antibiotics in cancer patients to prevent further increase of antibiotic resistance [30, 31]. Antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of bacterial isolates changed in recent years, due to the increased and incorrect use of antibiotics. Treating bacterial infection in cancer patients is clinically challenging due to an increasing level of resistance for most of the antibiotics used for empiric therapy. There is an emergence of multidrug-resistant K. pneumoniae, P. aeruginosa, A. baumannii, and S. aureus isolates in clinical settings [6, 32, 33].

Multidrug resistance has been increased throughout the world that is considered a public health threat [34, 35]. Several recent investigations reported the emergence of multidrug-resistant bacterial pathogens from different origins including humans, birds, cattle, and fish that increase the need for routine application of the antimicrobial susceptibility testing to detect the antibiotic of choice as well as the screening of the emerging MDR strains [36–40]. Antibiotic resistance is a growing problem in developing countries and in Ethiopia, the unregulated sale of antimicrobials leads to the emergence and rapid dissemination of resistant bacterial strains [41]. Rapid and reliable detection of pathogens and their antibiotic susceptibility patterns is crucial in the management of septic patients [42]. Therefore, understanding bacterial profile and antibiotic resistance for BSI is imperative to inform clinical practice and stewardship in relation to the appropriate use of antibiotics in cancer patients.

Materials and methods

Study area

The study was conducted at University of Gondar comprehensive specialized hospital (UoGCSH), located in Gondar city, Ethiopia, providing surgical, medical, pediatric, gynecologic, obstetric, oncologic, and ophthalmologic services for more than seven million people. It is a multidisciplinary specialized hospital with 700 inpatient beds and consists of an operating room, intensive care units, fistula center, different wards, and outpatient departments. The cancer treatment center of UoGCSH provides services for more than 2,300 cancer patients, and it has outpatient and inpatient departments with 20 beds.

Study design and period

A hospital-based cross-sectional study was conducted at UoGCSH from March to July 2021. All cancer confirmed patients who visited the UoGCSH cancer treatment center were the study population. Cancer patients who developed a fever at the time of hospital visits were included in the study period. However, study participants who were unable to give socio-demographic information and blood samples at the time of data collection were excluded.

Sample size determination and sampling techniques

The sample size was determined using a single population proportion formula using the prevalence reported at UoGCSH 19%, precision level 5%, and confidence interval 95%. The calculated sample size was 236, and we have got only 200 cancer patients during the study period, and a total of 200 samples were collected using a convenient sampling technique.

Bacterial isolation and identification

Blood samples (10 mL for adults and 4 mL for children) were collected from each patient who developed a fever at the time of diagnosis by experienced nurses before any antibiotic use [43]. Then the collected blood samples were transferred into sterile tryptic soy broth (Oxoid Ltd., Basingstoke, UK) and incubated at 37°C for seven days [44]. Bacteria growth indicators such as turbidity, hemolysis, clot formation checked on a daily bias for up to seven days, and tryptic soy broth (Oxoid Ltd., Basingstoke, UK) that showed signs of growth were Gram-stained and sub-cultured on blood agar (Oxoid Ltd., Basingstoke, UK), chocolate agar (Oxoid Ltd., Basingstoke, UK), MacConkey agar (Oxoid Ltd., Basingstoke, UK), and mannitol salt agar (Oxoid Ltd., Basingstoke, UK). After that, the inoculated culture plates were incubated aerobically at 37°C for 18–24 hours, and the isolates identified using standard microbiological methods [45].

Gram-negative bacteria were identified using a series of biochemical tests such as indole test, urease test, lysine decarboxylase test, triple sugar iron agar, citrate utilization, and motility tests. On the other hand, Gram-positive bacteria were identified based on Gram reaction, hemolytic pattern, catalase, and coagulase tests [45]. The isolates that were golden yellow colony on mannitol salt agar (Oxoid Ltd., Basingstoke, UK) and blood agar plate (Oxoid Ltd., Basingstoke, UK), Gram-positive cocci in clusters, catalase, and coagulase-positive were confirmed as S. aureus while isolates that were white colony blood agar plate (Oxoid Ltd., Basingstoke, UK), Gram-positive cocci, catalase positive and coagulase negative were confirmed as Coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) [46].

Antimicrobial susceptibility testing

An antimicrobial susceptibility test was carried out for each bacterial isolate using the Kirby–Bauer disc diffusion method. Briefly, three to five selected pure colonies were taken and transferred to a tube containing 5 ml of sterile normal saline and mixed gently to form a homogeneous suspension until the turbidity of suspension becomes adjusted to 0.5 McFarland standards. Then, using sterile cotton-tipped swabs, the bacteria distribute evenly over the entire surface of Mueller-Hinton agar (Oxoid Ltd., Basingstoke, UK). Then, the inoculated plates were left at room temperature for 15 minutes and using sterile forceps a set of antibiotic discs were placed on the inoculated MHA plates [43, 45].

Antimicrobials were selected according to Clinical Laboratory Standard Institute guideline (CLSI 2021) [47] and the antimicrobial classes were Penicillins (piperacillin/tazobactam (100/10μg, Oxoid Ltd., Basingstoke, UK), amoxicillin/clavulanic acid (20/10μg, Oxoid Ltd., Basingstoke, UK), ampicillin (10μg, Oxoid Ltd., Basingstoke, UK), penicillin (10μg, Oxoid Ltd., Basingstoke, UK)), Aminoglycosides (gentamicin (10μg, Oxoid Ltd., Basingstoke, UK), amikacin (30μg, Oxoid Ltd., Basingstoke, UK), Tobramycin (10μg, Oxoid Ltd., Basingstoke, UK)), Fluoroquinolones (ciprofloxacin (5μg, Oxoid Ltd., Basingstoke, UK)), Folate pathway inhibitors (trimethoprim-sulphamethoxazole (SXT) (25μg, Oxoid Ltd., Basingstoke, UK)), Glycopeptides (vancomycin (30μg, Oxoid Ltd., Basingstoke, UK), Tetracycline’s (tetracycline (30μg, Oxoid Ltd., Basingstoke, UK)), Carbapenems (meropenem (10μg, Oxoid Ltd., Basingstoke, UK)), Cephamycins (cefoxitin (30μg, Oxoid Ltd., Basingstoke, UK)), and Cephalosporins (ceftriaxone (30μg, Oxoid Ltd., Basingstoke, UK), ceftazidime (30μg, Oxoid Ltd., Basingstoke, UK)).

After placing the antibiotic discs, the MHA plates were allowed to stand for another 15 minutes at room temperature to dissolve antibiotics in the media. Then, plates were incubated at 37°C for 18 to 24 hours. Finally, zones of inhibitions were measured using a ruler and interpreted according to CLSI 2021 guidelines [47]. Cefoxitin susceptibility of S. aureus isolates was tested by placing cefoxitin (30μg) antibiotic discs on MHA using the Kirby–Bauer disc diffusion method and then incubated aerobically at 35∘C for 24 hours. Finally, S. aureus isolates zone of inhibition ≥ 22 mm classified as susceptible and ≤ 21 as non-susceptible. S. aureus isolates resistant to cefoxitin (≤ 21 mm) were confirmed as MRSA [48].

Data quality control and analysis

Sample collection, transportation, bacteriological cultivation, and biochemical tests were done according to standard microbiological procedures. Five percent (5%) of the prepared culture media were randomly selected and incubated aerobically for 24 hours at 37°C to cheek the sterility of culture media. In addition, known strains of S. aureus (ATCC 25923) and E. coli (ATCC 25922) were inoculated to check the performance of the prepared culture media. Inoculation of culture media, colony characterization, and measurement of susceptibility test was checked by an experienced microbiologist. To standardize the density of the inoculum of bacterial suspension, 0.5 McFarland turbidity standard was used. All data were checked for completeness, entered by EPI data version 4.6, and analyzed with SPSS version 20. Binary and multivariate logistic regression was done to determine the association between independent and dependent variables. A p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant at 95% confidence interval.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Ethical clearance was obtained from the ethical review committee of the School of Biomedical and Laboratory Sciences, University of Gondar (Ref. no. SBMLS/3024). Written informed consent from adults and consent from parents/guardians of the minors were obtained. Additionally, the objectives of the study were explained to study participants, and clarification was given before starting socio-demographic data and sample collection. To keep confidentiality of information from participants, no personal identifiers were used and the collected data were not available to anyone except for the investigator and the study was conducted according to the Declaration of Helsinki.

Results

Socio-demographic characteristics of study participants

In this study, a total of 200 cancer patients had included at University of Gondar cancer treatment center during the study period. Out of these, 67.5% (135/200) were males. The mean age of the study participants was 22.25 years with a standard deviation of ± 22.55 with an age range of 2 months– 83 years and 30.5% (61/200) of the study participants belonged to 5–15 years of age. The majorities, 56% (113/200) cancer patients were pediatrics, and 26.5% (53/200) of them belong under five years of age. In this study, most of the study participants had a history of fever and antibiotic therapy, 92% (185/200) and 28% (56/200), respectively. The socio-demographic characteristics of study participants are presented (Table 1).

thumbnail
Download:
Table 1. Socio-demographic characteristics of study participants from March-July 2021.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266919.t001

Phenotypic characteristics of the recovered isolates

A total of 200 blood samples were analyzed, and the prevalence of culture-positive bloodstream infection among cancer patients was 27% (54/200) (Fig 1), and six different types of bacterial isolates and yeast cells were isolated. Of these, S. aureus (31.5%, 17/54) was the frequently isolated bacteria followed by Coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS), (29.6%, 16/54), K. pneumoniae, (14.8%, 8/54), and P. aeruginosa, (9.3%, 5/54) (Fig 2). Regarding the phenotypic characteristics of S. aureus, isolates were identified based on their morphology and biochemical tests. Microscopically, the bacteria appeared as Gram-positive cocci, non-motile, and non-sporulated cocci. The bacteria grew well on mannitol salt agar and gave a golden yellow colony due to mannitol fermentation and β-hemolytic colonies on blood agar. Biochemically, all isolates were positive for catalase and coagulase tests. Concerning the distribution of S. aureus in the examined samples, the total prevalence of S. aureus was 31.5% (17/54).

thumbnail
Download:
Fig 1. Blood stream infections among cancer patients at University of Gondar comprehensive specialized hospital from March-July 2021.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266919.g001

thumbnail
Download:
Fig 2. Frequency of isolated organisms among cancer patients at University of Gondar comprehensive specialized hospital from March-July 2021.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266919.g002

The phenotypic characteristics of K. pneumoniae isolates were identified based on their morphology and biochemical characteristics. Microscopically, the bacteria looked like non-motile Gram-negative rods. The bacteria grew well on MacConkeys’s agar and gave characteristics of large mucoid, pink colonies due to lactose fermentation. Biochemically, all isolates were positive for lactose fermentation, citrate-utilization, lysine decarboxylase test, and urease tests. Simultaneously, they were negative for the indole test and H2S production. The bacteriological inspection showed that the total prevalence of K. pneumoniae was 14.8% (8/54).

Moreover, the bacteriological examination of P. aeruginosa revealed that all isolates were motile, Gram-negative bacilli, arranged in double or short chains. The isolates were positive for catalase and citrate test while negative for H2S production, urease, and indole test. Based on the morphological and biochemical characteristics, all isolates identified as P. aeruginosa, and the bacterium grew on MacConkey’s agar and showed fat, smooth, non-lactose fermenting colonies. The isolates of P. aeruginosa displayed a bluish-green pigmented large colonies with characteristic “fruity” odor on culture media at 37°C for 24 hours. The prevalence of P. aeruginosa was 9.3% (5/54) in the examined samples.

On the other hand, the proportion of the Gram-positive bacteria was 61.1% (33/54), and the predominant Gram-positive bacterium was S. aureus which was responsible for 51.5% (17/33) of BSIs, and fungal isolates were 7.4% (4/54). The proportion of the Gram-negative bacteria was 31.5% (17/54), and among the Gram-negative isolates, K. pneumoniae was the dominant Gram-negative bacteria 47.1% (8/17). The prevalence of bloodstream infection caused by Gram-positive bacteria (61.1%, 33) was higher than Gram-negative bacteria (31.5%, 17). Among patients who had BSI’s, the highest prevalence of bloodstream infection was observed among males, 66.7% (36/54), and less than 15 years of study participants, 42.6% (23/54). Culture-positive bloodstream infection was high in pediatric cancer patients 88.9% (48/54) compared to adult cancer patients. The prevalence of culture-positive bloodstream infection among cancer patients who had a history of antibiotic therapy was 27.8% (15/54).

Risk factors for bloodstream infection

Categorical variables were analyzed using Pearson chi-square. Based on this statistical method, age category and pediatric patients were significantly associated with bloodstream infection among cancer patients. Pediatric study participants were more venerable to bloodstream infection (P = 0.000) than adult participants. Moreover, Cancer patients less than 45 years of age were more at risk for bloodstream infection (P < 0.003) than adult cancer patients whose age was greater than 45 years. However, fever (P = 0.8) and antibiotic therapy (P = 0.8) were not statistically significant with bacterial bloodstream infections (Table 2).

thumbnail
Download:
Table 2. Associations of independent variables and BSI among cancer patients at UoGCSH from March-July 2021.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266919.t002

Antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of bacterial isolates

Bacterial antimicrobial susceptibility tests done for bacterial isolates, and meropenem (100%), amikacin (100%), piperacillin/tazobactam (72.3%), ceftazidime (73.5%) are effective antimicrobial agents to treat Gram-negative bacterial isolates while cefoxitin (81.2%), and penicillin (70.5%) effective against Gram-positive isolates. Moreover, most Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacterial isolates are sensitive to gentamycin (75.9%). All K. pneumoniae isolates were susceptible to meropenem (100%, 8), while the majority of K. pneumoniae isolates were sensitive to amikacin (75%, 6) and augmentin (75%, 6). The majority of P. aeruginosa isolates were susceptible to amikacin (100%, 5), meropenem (100%, 5), and ceftazidime (80%, 4). Additionally, the majority of the S. aureus isolates were susceptible to cefoxitin (81.2%) and the rest 18.8% of S. aureus isolates were MRSA. Furthermore, S. aureus isolates were susceptible to penicillin (70.5%), and gentamycin (70.5%) (Table 3).

thumbnail
Download:
Table 3. Antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of bacterial isolates among cancer patients at UoGCSH from March-July 2021.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266919.t003

Multidrug resistance pattern of bacterial isolates

Multidrug-resistant isolates refer to an isolate resistant to at least one antibiotic in three or more antimicrobial classes. In this study, the prevalence of MDR isolates was 17.1% (n = 6). Multidrug resistance was detected among Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria, 83.3%, and 16.7%, respectively. Gram-negative bacterial isolates showed a high prevalence of MDR than Gram-positive isolates. Out of 50 bacterial isolates, 37.5% (n = 3) of the K. pneumoniae isolates were found multidrug-resistant. MDR was observed in P. aeruginosa (20%, 1), A. baumannii (50%, 1), and S. aureus (6.25%, 1) (Table 4). Moreover, K. pneumoniae showed extensively drug-resistant (XDR) that is non-susceptibility to at least one agent in tetracycline’s, aminoglycosides, cephalosporins, fluoroquinolones, folate pathway inhibitors, and penicillin’s (Table 5).

thumbnail
Download:
Table 4. Frequency and multidrug resistance pattern of bacterial isolates at UoGCSH from March-July 2021.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266919.t004

thumbnail
Download:
Table 5. MDR, XDR and PDR pattern of bacterial isolates at UoGCSH from March-July 2021.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266919.t005

Discussion

Bloodstream infections are a cause of significant morbidity and mortality in cancer patients. To our knowledge, this study is the first comprehensively to address microbial spectrum and drug-susceptibility patterns of pathogens causing BSIs in cancer patients in the study area. The prevalence of bloodstream infection in this study was 27%, which is higher than a study conducted in Iraq 21.4% [4], Turkey 14.5% [6], Ethiopia 13.2% [12], Ghana 22% [49], Iran 7.95% [50], and South Africa 13% [51]. However, lower than a study reported in India 33.3% [52], Qatar 38.7% [16], India 56% [53], Zimbabwe 35.2% [54], Pakistan 43.6% [55], Japan 71.9% [56], Turkey 50.5% [57], and Ethiopia 71% [58]. Since the etiology of bacterial infections differs between centers and countries and changes over time, the difference in epidemiology of bacterial infections might be due to differences in geographic location, sample size, diagnostic technique, and infection control policies in the hospital.

Gram-positive bacteria were the predominant which was 66.1%. This finding was higher than a study conducted in Iraq 24.9% [4], Taiwan 42.3% [5], Korea 32.7% [12], India 31.8% [13], Greece 44% [14], Qatar 55% [16], Pakistan 43% [17], Turkey 10.9% [18], Zimbabwe 56% [54], Pakistan 15% [55], and Japan 15.3% [56] while Gram-negative bacteria were 31.4%, which is lower than a study conducted in Korea 55.6% [12], India 68% [13], Iraq 75% [4], Taiwan 44% [5], Greece 51.5% [14], Turkey 52.6% [18], Ghana 43%% [49], Zimbabwe 42% [54], and Pakistan 85% [55]. But Gram-negative bacteria in this study were higher than a study conducted in Turkey 13.2% [56]. Many studies reveal that Gram-negative bacteria were highly responsible for BSI among cancer patients. But Gram-positive cocci were predominant for bloodstream infections. Our result is supported by a study conducted in India [13], Sweden [59], South Africa [51], Addis Abeba, Ethiopia [58]. The possible reason for the preponderance of Gram-positive bacteria in this study might be the increased use of indwelling catheters. Moreover, chemotherapy-induced mucositis and the use of both prophylactic and empiric antibiotic regimens targeting Gram-negative bacteria diminishes recovery of Gram-negative pathogens, while selecting for Gram-positive bacteria were reported.

The bacterial infections epidemiology among cancer patients has changed significantly with the passage of time in recent decades and has shifted from Gram-negative to Gram-positive pathogens [3]. Bacterial infections, particularly those due to Gram-positive bacteria, continue to predominate in patients with cancer [60, 61]. The most probable explanation for this shift is the use of prophylactic antibiotics, the extensive use of central venous catheters, and the intensity and form of cancer treatment [62]. On the other hand, similar reports from developing countries still reveal the Gram-negative predominance [47, 63]. The relatively lower use of indwelling medical devices, as well as low utilization of prophylactic antibiotic regimens in cancer patients, have been indicated as factors in the dominance of Gram-negative bacteria in developing countries [64]. Although these conditions hold true in our setting, the predominance of Gram-positive bacteria in our case might be due to Gram-positive bacteria have a strong adhesion and biofilm forming abilities and they frequently isolated in the hospital area.

Among Gram-positive bacteria, S. aureus (51.5%) was the commonest isolate, which is in line with a study conducted in Addis Abeba [58], Sudan [65], North America [66], and Japan [67]. However, this finding was higher in a study conducted in South Korea 8.9% [12], India 12.6% [13], Sweden 4% [15], Zimbabwe 8% [54], and Turkey 2% [57]. In our study, S. aureus was 81% susceptible to cefoxitin and 70.5% for gentamycin [68], which was in line with a study conducted in India [13] but many scholars agreed that these antibiotics are highly resistant which indicates MRSA [17, 54, 69]. S. aureus was the major microbial driver of sepsis amongst cancer patients and the treatment of S. aureus infections is complicated due to the bacteria being highly adaptable to resist many antibiotics, and no vaccine is available [70]. Gram-negative bacteria were 100% susceptible to amikacin and meropenem and 73% susceptible to ceftazidime. This finding was similar to a study conducted in Taiwan 100% to meropenem [5], in Qatar 100% susceptible to amikacin and carbapenem [16], in Zimbabwe which was 100% susceptible to amikacin and meropenem [54]. Infections caused by S. aureus, K. pneumoniae, and P. aeruginosa are difficult to treat because they can acquire resistance to many antibiotics by modification of antibiotic molecules, decreased antibiotic penetration or increased efflux, and bypassing of target site [22, 71, 72].

The overall prevalence of multidrug resistance was 17.1% and lower than a study conducted in Taiwan 44% [5], Qatar 28.4% [16], Ghana 44.9% [49], Mexico 39.2% [73], Australia 50% [74], and Italy 25.7% [75]. This variation might be due to the difference in empirical treatment and prophylaxis in the study area. Besides this, Gram-negative bacteria showed a high MDR pattern, 83% and about 40% of Gram-negative bacteria in the current study were multidrug-resistant. This finding is comparable with a study conducted in Pakistan [17]. This high rate of multidrug resistance is an important public health concern that needs to be addressed. Studies have shown that infections caused by MDR bacteria have higher morbidity and mortality rates [66, 76]. Therefore, appropriate use of antibiotics should be ensured in our setting. Treatment of the patient should be based on the antimicrobial susceptibly pattern of the etiologic agent. Our finding was not agreed with a study conducted in Qatar which showed Gram-positive cocci had a high rate of MDR pattern, 32% [16]. Being pediatrics patients were statically associated with bloodstream infection (p = 0.000). The reason for this could be pediatric cancer patients will have a low immune system and poor personal hygienic practice.

Limitations of the study

As a limitation of this study, selection bias might be introduced because of the convenient sampling technique. Moreover, because of budget constraints and lack of facility, we were unable to perform molecular analysis such as detection of antibiotic resistance genes and virulence genes using PCR, and gene sequencing to associate between phenotypic and genotypic multidrug resistance in the recovered isolates.

Conclusion and recommendations

BSI’s remains an important health problem in cancer patients and Gram-positive bacteria were more common as etiologic agents of BSIs in cancer patients. S. aureus was the dominant bacteria followed by CoNS, K. pneumoniae, and P. aeruginosa. Pediatric cancer patients are at high risk for bloodstream bacterial infections and significant MDR bacterial isolates were detected. Meropenem and cefoxitin were the most effective antibiotics for the treatment of Gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria, respectively. Routine bacterial surveillance and study of their resistance patterns may guide successful antimicrobial therapy and improve the quality of care. Therefore, strict regulation of antibiotic stewardship and infection control programs should be considered in the study area.

Supporting information

S1 Table. The AST interpretation chart (extracted from CLSI, 2021).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266919.s001

(DOCX)

S2 Table. Antimicrobial susceptibility pattern collection form.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266919.s002

(DOCX)

S1 Dataset. Dataset used for analysis of the result.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266919.s003

(SAV)

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank all participants of this research, University of Gondar Hospital, the staff members of Medical Microbiology, School of Biomedical and Laboratory Sciences for their contribution to the maturation and the success of this research.

References

  1. 1. Von Knorring N, Nana T, Chibabhai V. Cumulative antimicrobial susceptibility data for a tertiary-level paediatric oncology unit in Johannesburg, South Africa. SA Journal of Oncology. 2019 Jan 1; 3(1):1–8.
  2. 2. Saghir S, Faiz M, Saleem M, Younus A, Aziz H. Characterization and anti-microbial susceptibility of gram-negative bacteria isolated from bloodstream infections of cancer patients on chemotherapy in Pakistan. Indian journal of medical microbiology. 2009 Oct 1; 27(4):341–347. pmid:19736404
  3. 3. Alghamdi S. Microbiological profile and antibiotic vulnerability of bacterial isolates from cancer patients. Cellular and Molecular Biology. 2021 Nov 25; 67(3):190–194. pmid:34933710
  4. 4. Uso RS, Taher CA. Bacterial profile, antibiotic resistance patterns, and associated factors among hematological malignant patients in Erbil city. Zanco Journal of Pure and Applied Sciences. 2021; 33 (3): 70–84.
  5. 5. Kuo F-C, Wang S-M, Shen C-F, Ma Y-J, Ho T-S, Chen J-S, et al. Bloodstream infections in pediatric patients with acute leukemia: Emphasis on gram-negative bacteria infections. Journal of Microbiology, Immunology and Infection. 2017; 50 (4): 507–513. pmid:26442676
  6. 6. Akova M. Epidemiology of antimicrobial resistance in bloodstream infections. Virulence. 2016 Apr 2; 7(3):252–266. pmid:26984779
  7. 7. Friedman H, Specter S, Watanabe M, Pan SH. Tumor-induced immunosuppression. The American Journal of Pathology. 1978 Nov; 93(2):499. pmid:102206
  8. 8. Singh R, Jain S, Chabbra R, Naithani R, Upadhyay A, Walia M. Characterization and anti-microbial susceptibility of bacterial isolates: Experience from a tertiary care cancer center in Delhi. Indian Journal of Cancer. 2014 Oct 1; 51(4):477. pmid:26842169
  9. 9. KV R. Challenges in the treatment of infections caused by gram positive and gram-negative bacteria in patients with cancer and neutropenia. Clin Infect Dis. 2005; 40: (4): S246–252.
  10. 10. Gonzalez-Barca E F-SA, Carratala J, Salar A, Peris J, Granena A, et al. Prognostic factors influencing mortality in cancer patients with neutropenia and bacteremia. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 1999; 18: (8): 539–544. pmid:10517190
  11. 11. Bhabhor H, Bhabhor U, Shingala H, Sinha M. Bacteriological study of blood stream infection (BSI) in ICU patients. Indian Journal of Microbiology Research. 2018; 5(3):368–73.
  12. 12. Kang C-I, Song J-H, Chung DR, Peck KR, Yeom J-S, Son JS, et al. Bloodstream infections in adult patients with cancer: clinical features and pathogenic significance of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Supportive Care in Cancer. 2012; 20 (10): 2371–2378. pmid:22193772
  13. 13. Prabhash K, Medhekar A, Ghadyalpatil N, Noronha V, Biswas S, Kurkure P, et al. Blood stream infections in cancer patients: A single center experience of isolates and sensitivity pattern. Indian journal of cancer. 2010; 47 (2): 184. pmid:20448384
  14. 14. Anatoliotaki M, Valatas V, Mantadakis E, Apostolakou H, Mavroudis D, Georgoulias V, et al. Bloodstream infections in patients with solid tumors: associated factors, microbial spectrum and outcome. Infection. 2004; 32 (2): 65–71. pmid:15057569
  15. 15. Baskaran ND, Gan GG, Adeeba K, Sam IC. Bacteremia in patients with febrile neutropenia after chemotherapy at a university medical center in Malaysia. International Journal of Infectious Diseases. 2007 Nov 1; 11(6):513–517. pmid:17459753
  16. 16. Al-Mulla NA, Taj-Aldeen SJ, El Shafie S, Janahi M, Al-Nasser AA, Chandra P. Bacterial bloodstream infections and antimicrobial susceptibility pattern in pediatric hematology/oncology patients after anticancer chemotherapy. Infection and drug resistance. 2014; 7: 289. pmid:25395866
  17. 17. Butt T, Afzal RK, Ahmad RN, Salman M, Mahmood A, Anwar M. Bloodstream infections in febrile neutropenic patients: bacterial spectrum and antimicrobial susceptibility pattern. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad. 2004; 16 (1): 18–22. pmid:15125174
  18. 18. Kara Ö, Zarakolu P, Aşçioğlu S, Etgül S, Uz B, Büyükaşik Y, et al. Epidemiology and emerging resistance in bacterial bloodstream infections in patients with hematologic malignancies. Infectious Diseases. 2015; 47 (10): 686–693. pmid:26024284
  19. 19. Oogai Y, Matsuo M, Hashimoto M, Kato F, Sugai M, Komatsuzawa H. Expression of virulence factors by Staphylococcus aureus grown in serum. Applied and environmental microbiology. 2011 Nov 15; 77(22):8097–105. pmid:21926198
  20. 20. Liu GY. Molecular pathogenesis of Staphylococcus aureus infection. Pediatric research. 2009 May; 65(7):71–7. pmid:19190527
  21. 21. Powers ME, Wardenburg JB. Igniting the fire: Staphylococcus aureus virulence factors in the pathogenesis of sepsis. PLoS pathogens. 2014 Feb 13; 10(2):e1003871. pmid:24550724
  22. 22. Victor LY, Hansen DS, Ko WC, Sagnimeni A, Klugman KP, Von Gottberg A et al. Virulence characteristics of Klebsiella and clinical manifestations of K. pneumoniae bloodstream infections. Emerging infectious diseases. 2007 Jul; 13(7):986. pmid:18214169
  23. 23. Compain F, Babosan A, Brisse S, Genel N, Audo J, Ailloud F et al. Multiplex PCR for detection of seven virulence factors and K1/K2 capsular serotypes of Klebsiella pneumoniae. Journal of clinical microbiology. 2014 Dec; 52(12):4377–4380. pmid:25275000
  24. 24. Candan ED, Aksöz N. Klebsiella pneumoniae: characteristics of carbapenem resistance and virulence factors. Acta Biochimica Polonica. 2015 Dec 4; 62(4). pmid:26637376
  25. 25. Strateva T, Mitov I. Contribution of an arsenal of virulence factors to pathogenesis of Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections. Annals of microbiology. 2011 Dec; 61(4):717–732.
  26. 26. Olejnickova K, Hola V, Ruzicka F. Catheter-related infections caused by Pseudomonas aeruginosa: virulence factors involved and their relationships. Pathogens and Disease. 2014 Nov 1; 72(2):87–94. pmid:24842562
  27. 27. Persat A, Inclan YF, Engel JN, Stone HA, Gitai Z. Type IV pili mechanochemically regulate virulence factors in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2015 Jun 16; 112(24):7563–7568. pmid:26041805
  28. 28. El‐Mahallawy HA, El‐Wakil M, Moneer MM, Shalaby L. Antibiotic resistance is associated with longer bacteremic episodes and worse outcome in febrile neutropenic children with cancer. Pediatric blood & cancer. 2011 Aug; 57(2):283–288. pmid:21671364
  29. 29. Montassier E, Batard E, Gastinne T, Potel G, de La Cochetière MF. Recent changes in bacteremia in patients with cancer: a systematic review of epidemiology and antibiotic resistance. European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases. 2013 Jul; 32(7):841–850. pmid:23354675
  30. 30. Nesher L, Rolston KV. The current spectrum of infection in cancer patients with chemotherapy related neutropenia. Infection. 2014 Feb; 42(1):5–13. pmid:23975584
  31. 31. Zinner SH. Changing epidemiology of infections in patients with neutropenia and cancer: emphasis on gram-positive and resistant bacteria. Clinical infectious diseases. 1999 Sep 1; 29(3):490–494. pmid:10530434
  32. 32. Moghnieh R, Estaitieh N, Mugharbil A, Jisr T, Abdallah DI, Ziade F et al. Third generation cephalosporin resistant Enterobacteriaceae and multidrug resistant gram-negative bacteria causing bacteremia in febrile neutropenia adult cancer patients in Lebanon, broad spectrum antibiotics use as a major risk factor, and correlation with poor prognosis. Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology. 2015 Feb 12; 5:11. pmid:25729741
  33. 33. Montazeri EA, Khosravi AD, Saki M, Sirous M, Keikhaei B, Seyed-Mohammadi S. Prevalence of extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae causing bloodstream infections in cancer patients from southwest of Iran. Infection and Drug Resistance. 2020; 13:1319. pmid:32440169
  34. 34. Makharita RR, El-Kholy I, Hetta HF, Abdelaziz MH, Hagagy FI, Ahmed AA et al. Antibiogram and genetic characterization of carbapenem-resistant gram-negative pathogens incriminated in healthcare-associated infections. Infection and drug resistance. 2020; 13:3991. pmid:33177849
  35. 35. Algammal AM, Hashem HR, Alfifi KJ, Hetta HF, Sheraba NS, Ramadan H et al. atpD gene sequencing, multidrug resistance traits, virulence-determinants, and antimicrobial resistance genes of emerging XDR and MDR-Proteus mirabilis. Scientific reports. 2021 May 4; 11(1):1–5. pmid:33414495
  36. 36. Algammal AM, Mabrok M, Sivaramasamy E, Youssef FM, Atwa MH, El-Kholy AW et al. Emerging MDR-Pseudomonas aeruginosa in fish commonly harbor oprL and toxA virulence genes and blaTEM, blaCTX-M, and tetA antibiotic-resistance genes. Scientific reports. 2020 Sep 29; 10(1):1–2. pmid:31913322
  37. 37. Abolghait SK, Fathi AG, Youssef FM, Algammal AM. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) isolated from chicken meat and giblets often produces staphylococcal enterotoxin B (SEB) in non-refrigerated raw chicken livers. International journal of food microbiology. 2020 Sep 2; 328:108669. pmid:32497922
  38. 38. Algammal AM, Hetta HF, Elkelish A, Alkhalifah DH, Hozzein WN, Batiha GE et al. Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA): one health perspective approach to the bacterium epidemiology, virulence factors, antibiotic-resistance, and zoonotic impact. Infection and Drug Resistance. 2020; 13:3255. pmid:33061472
  39. 39. Algammal AM, Enany ME, El-Tarabili RM, Ghobashy MO, Helmy YA. Prevalence, antimicrobial resistance profiles, virulence and enterotoxins-determinant genes of MRSA isolated from subclinical bovine mastitis in Egypt. Pathogens. 2020 May; 9(5):362. pmid:32397408
  40. 40. Algammal AM, Hetta HF, Batiha GE, Hozzein WN, El Kazzaz WM, Hashem HR et al. Virulence-determinants and antibiotic-resistance genes of MDR-E. coli isolated from secondary infections following FMD-outbreak in cattle. Scientific reports. 2020 Nov 13; 10(1):1–3. pmid:31913322
  41. 41. Dagnew M, Yismaw G, Gizachew M, Gadisa A, Abebe T, Tadesse T, et al. Bacterial profile and antimicrobial susceptibility pattern in septicemia suspected patients attending Gondar University Hospital, Northwest Ethiopia. BMC research notes. 2013; 6 (1): 1–7. pmid:23875886
  42. 42. Gonsalves MD, Sakr Y. Early identification of sepsis. Current Infectious Disease Reports. 2010 Sep; 12(5):329–335. pmid:21308514
  43. 43. Arega B, Woldeamanuel Y, Adane K, Sherif AA, Asrat D. Microbial spectrum and drug-resistance profile of isolates causing bloodstream infections in febrile cancer patients at a referral hospital in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Infection and drug resistance. 2018; 11:1511. pmid:30271184
  44. 44. Al-Asady FM, Al-Saray DA, Obed AW. Incidence of septicemia. Etiology and antimicrobial susceptibility testing among patients admitted to tertiary care hospital. The Journal of Infection in Developing Countries. 2020 Dec 31; 14(12):1387–1394. pmid:33378280
  45. 45. Arega B, Wolde-Amanuel Y, Adane K, Belay E, Abubeker A, Asrat D. Rare bacterial isolates causing bloodstream infections in Ethiopian patients with cancer. Infectious Agents and Cancer. 2017 Dec; 12(1):1–6. pmid:28702079
  46. 46. Tigabu A, Tiruneh M, Mekonnen F. Nasal carriage rate, antimicrobial susceptibility pattern, and associated factors of Staphylococcus aureus with special emphasis on MRSA among urban and rural elementary school children in Gondar, Northwest Ethiopia: A comparative cross-sectional study. Advances in preventive medicine. 2018 Dec 11; 2018.
  47. 47. Mangaraj J BD. Microbiological profile of blood stream infection in neutropenic patient in a tertiary care centre. Int J Curr Microbiol App Sci. 2017; 6 (3): 1137–1145.
  48. 48. Firesbhat A, Tigabu A, Tegene B, Gelaw B. Bacterial profile of high-touch surfaces, leftover drugs and antiseptics together with their antimicrobial susceptibility patterns at University of Gondar Comprehensive Specialized Hospital, Northwest Ethiopia. BMC microbiology. 2021 Dec; 21(1):1–3. pmid:33386072
  49. 49. Obeng-Nkrumah N, Labi A-K, Acquah ME, Donkor ES. Bloodstream infections in patients with malignancies: implications for antibiotic treatment in a Ghanaian tertiary setting. BMC research notes. 2015; 8 (1): 1–10.
  50. 50. Rabirad N, Mohammadpoor M, Lari AR, Shojaie A, Bayat R, Alebouyeh M. Antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of the gram-negative bacteria isolated from septicemia in Children’s Medical Center, Tehran, Iran. Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene. 2014; 55 (1): 23. pmid:25916028
  51. 51. Mvalo T, Eley B, Bamford C, Stanley C, Chagomerana M, Hendricks M, et al. Bloodstream infections in oncology patients at red cross war memorial Children’s hospital, Cape Town, from 2012 to 2014. International Journal of Infectious Diseases. 2018; 77: 40–47. pmid:30244075
  52. 52. Bhat S, Muthunatarajan S, Mulki SS, Archana Bhat K, Kotian KH. Bacterial Infection among Cancer Patients: Analysis of Isolates and Antibiotic Sensitivity Pattern. International journal of microbiology. 2021; 2021. pmid:33510793
  53. 53. Karanwal AB, Parikh BJ, Goswami P, Panchal HP, Parekh BB, Patel KB. Review of clinical profile and bacterial spectrum and sensitivity patterns of pathogens in febrile neutropenic patients in hematological malignancies: a retrospective analysis from a single center. Indian Journal of Medical and Paediatric Oncology. 2013 Apr; 34(02):85–88. pmid:24049293
  54. 54. Chinowaita F, Chaka W, Nyazika TK, Maboreke TC, Tizauone E, Mapondera P, et al. Sepsis in cancer patients residing in Zimbabwe: spectrum of bacterial and fungal aetiologies and their antimicrobial susceptibility patterns. BMC infectious diseases. 2020; 20 (1): 1–9. pmid:32085740
  55. 55. Taj M, Farzana T, Shah T, Maqsood S, Ahmed S, Shamsi T. Clinical and microbiological profile of pathogens in febrile neutropenia in hematological malignancies: A single center prospective analysis. Journal of oncology. 2015; 2015. pmid:26290665
  56. 56. Saito T, Yoshioka S, Iinuma Y, Takakura S, Fujihara N, Ichinohe T, et al. Effects on spectrum and susceptibility patterns of isolates causing bloodstream infection by restriction of fluoroquinolone prophylaxis in a hematology–oncology unit. European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases. 2008; 27 (3): 209–216.
  57. 57. Kaya M, Beştaş R, Bacalan F, Bacaksız F, Arslan EG, Kaplan MA. Microbial profile and antibiotic sensitivity pattern in bile cultures from endoscopic retrograde cholangiography patients. World Journal of Gastroenterology: WJG. 2012; 18 (27): 3585. pmid:22826624
  58. 58. Feld R. Bloodstream infections in cancer patients with febrile neutropenia. International journal of antimicrobial agents. 2008 Nov 1; 32:S30–3. pmid:18778919
  59. 59. Rubio M, Palau L, Vivas JR, Del Potro E, Diaz-Mediavilla J, Alvarez A, et al. Predominance of gram-positive microorganisms as a cause of septicemia in patients with hematological malignancies. Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology. 1994 Feb; 15(2):101–1044. pmid:8201230
  60. 60. Safdar A, Rolston KV. Stenotrophomonas maltophilia: changing spectrum of a serious bacterial pathogen in patients with cancer. Clinical Infectious Diseases. 2007 Dec 15; 45(12):1602–1209. pmid:18190323
  61. 61. Elseady NS, Khamis NA, AbdelGhani S, Rabea HM, Elanany MG, Nashat Alsheshtawi K et al. Antibiotic sensitivity/resistance pattern of hospital acquired blood stream infection in children cancer patients: A retrospective study. International journal of clinical practice. 2021 Oct; 75(10):e14617. pmid:34235824
  62. 62. Aust C, Tolfvenstam T, Broliden K, Ljungman P, Kalin M, Giske CG et al. Bacteremia in Swedish hematological patients with febrile neutropenia: bacterial spectrum and antimicrobial resistance patterns. Scandinavian journal of infectious diseases. 2013 Apr 1; 45(4):285–291. pmid:23113817
  63. 63. Mangaraj O BD, Mohan DG. Gram negative bacilli causing blood stream infection in febrile neutropenic patients in a tertiary care centre. Int J Contemp Med Res. 2017; 4): (7): 1599–1603.
  64. 64. Kurtaran B CA, Tasova Y, et al. Hospital-acquired blood-stream infections in cancer patients between 2005 and 2007 in a Turkish university hospital. Arch Clin Microbiol. 2010; 1: (2): 4.
  65. 65. Elseed Y IM, Ahmed WA. Isolation and identification of aerobic bacterial pathogens from septicaemic cancer patients in Khartoum, Sudan. Clinical Medical Journal. 2015; 1: (4): 122–125.
  66. 66. Mutnick AH KJ, Jones RN. Cancer Resistance Surveillance Program: initial results from hematology–oncology centers in North America. Ann Pharmacother. 2003; 7 (1): 47–56. pmid:12503932
  67. 67. Kanamaru A TY. Microbiological data for patients with febrile neutropenia. Clinical Infectious Diseases. 2004; 39 (Suppl 1): S7–S10. pmid:15250014
  68. 68. Lubwama M, Phipps W, Najjuka CF, Kajumbula H, Ddungu H, Kambugu JB, et al. Bacteremia in febrile cancer patients in Uganda. BMC research notes. 2019; 12 (1): 1–6. pmid:30602384
  69. 69. Moghnieh R, Estaitieh N, Mugharbil A, Jisr T, Abdallah DI, Ziade F, et al. Third generation cephalosporin resistant Enterobacteriaceae and multidrug resistant gram-negative bacteria causing bacteremia in febrile neutropenia adult cancer patients in Lebanon, broad spectrum antibiotics use as a major risk factor, and correlation with poor prognosis. Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology. 2015; 5: 11. pmid:25729741
  70. 70. Cheung GY, Bae JS, Otto M. Pathogenicity and virulence of Staphylococcus aureus. Virulence. 2021 Jan 1; 12(1):547–569. pmid:33522395
  71. 71. Subedi D, Vijay AK, Willcox M. Overview of mechanisms of antibiotic resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa: an ocular perspective. Clinical and Experimental Optometry. 2018 Mar 1; 101(2):162–171. pmid:29044738
  72. 72. Jung J, Lee J, Yu SN, Kim YK, Lee JY, Sung H et al. Incidence and risk factors of ocular infection caused by Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy. 2016 Apr 1; 60(4):2012–2017. pmid:26824952
  73. 73. Cornejo-Juárez P, Vilar-Compte D, Pérez-Jiménez C, Namendys-Silva S, Sandoval-Hernández S, Volkow-Fernández P. The impact of hospital-acquired infections with multidrug-resistant bacteria in an oncology intensive care unit. International Journal of Infectious Diseases. 2015; 31: 31–34. pmid:25528484
  74. 74. Levene I, Castagnola E, Haeusler GM. Antibiotic-resistant gram-negative blood stream infections in children with cancer: A review of epidemiology, risk factors, and outcome. The Pediatric infectious disease journal. 2018; 37 (5): 495–498. pmid:29432384
  75. 75. Cattaneo C, Di Blasi R, Skert C, Candoni A, Martino B, Di Renzo N, et al. Bloodstream infections in haematological cancer patients colonized by multidrug-resistant bacteria. Annals of hematology. 2018; 97 (9): 1717–1726. pmid:29705860
  76. 76. Günther G, Björkholm M, Björklind A, Engervall P, Stiernstedt G. Septicemia in patients with hematological disorders and neutropenia: a retrospective study of causative agents and their resistance profile. Scandinavian journal of infectious diseases. 1991; 23 (5): 589–598. pmid:1767255