Evidence Hub

Randomized Double-Blind Phase II Trial of Fecal Microbiota Transplantation Versus Placebo in Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation and AML

Rashidi A, Ebadi M, Rehman TU, Elhusseini H, Kazadi D, Halaweish H, Khan MH, Hoeschen A et al.

Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 2023

74 participants · 67 citations

Abstract

Purpose: Gut microbiota injury in allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) recipients and patients with AML has been associated with adverse clinical outcomes. Previous studies in these patients have shown improvements in various microbiome indices after fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT). However, whether microbiome improvements translate into improved clinical outcomes remains unclear. We examined this question in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase II trial.

Methods: Two independent cohorts of allogeneic HCT recipients and patients with AML receiving induction chemotherapy were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive standardized oral encapsulated FMT versus placebo upon neutrophil recovery. After each course of antibacterial antibiotics, patients received a study treatment. Up to three treatments were administered within 3 months. The primary end point was 4-month all-cause infection rate. Patients were followed for 9 months.

Results: In the HCT cohort (74 patients), 4-month infection density was 0.74 and 0.91 events per 100 patient-days in FMT and placebo arms, respectively (infection rate ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.48 to 1.42; P = .49). In the AML cohort (26 patients), 4-month infection density was 0.93 in the FMT arm and 1.25 in the placebo arm, with an infection rate ratio of 0.74 (95% CI, 0.32 to 1.71; P = .48). Unique donor bacterial sequences comprised 25%-30% of the fecal microbiota after FMT. FMT improved postantibiotic recovery…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 74 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free