-
Deutsches Arzteblatt International Apr 2019The incidence of invasive fungal infection is approximately 6 cases per 100 000 persons per year. It is estimated that only half of such infections are detected during... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The incidence of invasive fungal infection is approximately 6 cases per 100 000 persons per year. It is estimated that only half of such infections are detected during the patient's lifetime, making this one of the more common overlooked causes of death in intensive-care patients. The low detection rate is due in part to the complexity of the diagnostic work-up, in which the clinical, radiological, and microbiological findings must be considered. Fungi with resistance to antimycotic drugs have been found to be on the rise around the world.
METHODS
This review is based on pertinent publications retrieved from a selective search in PubMed, with special attention to guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of invasive fungal infections caused by Candida spp., Aspergillus spp., Mucorales, and Fusarium spp.
RESULTS
The clinical risk factors for invasive fungal infection include, among others, congenital immune deficiency, protracted (>10 days) marked granulocytopenia (<0.5 x 109/L), allogeneic stem-cell transplantation, and treatment with immunosuppressive drugs or corticosteroids. High-risk groups include patients in intensive care and those with structural pulmonary disease and/or compli- cated influenza. The first line of treatment, supported by the findings of randomized clinical trials, consists of echinocandins for in- fections with Candida spp. (candidemia response rates: 75.6% for anidulafungin vs. 60.2% for fluconazole) and azole antimycotic drugs for infections with Aspergillus spp. (response rates: 52.8% for voriconazole vs. 31.6% for conventional amphotericin B). The recommended first-line treatment also depends on the local epidemiology. This challenge should be met by interdisciplinary collaboration. Therapeutic decision-making should also take account of the often severe undesired effects of antimycotic drugs (including impairment of hepatic and/or renal function) and the numerous interactions that some of them have with other drugs.
CONCLUSION
Invasive fungal infections are often overlooked in routine hospital care. They should be incorporated into antimicro- bial stewardship programs as an essential component. There is also a pressing need for the development of new classes of antimycotic drug.
Topics: Antifungal Agents; Aspergillus; Candida; Humans; Incidence; Invasive Fungal Infections
PubMed: 31159914
DOI: 10.3238/arztebl.2019.0271 -
Infection Dec 2017Because of the high mortality of invasive fungal infections (IFIs), appropriate exposure to antifungals appears to be crucial for therapeutic efficacy and safety. (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Because of the high mortality of invasive fungal infections (IFIs), appropriate exposure to antifungals appears to be crucial for therapeutic efficacy and safety.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This review summarises published pharmacokinetic data on systemically administered antifungals focusing on co-morbidities, target-site penetration, and combination antifungal therapy.
CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION
Amphotericin B is eliminated unchanged via urine and faeces. Flucytosine and fluconazole display low protein binding and are eliminated by the kidney. Itraconazole, voriconazole, posaconazole and isavuconazole are metabolised in the liver. Azoles are substrates and inhibitors of cytochrome P450 (CYP) isoenzymes and are therefore involved in numerous drug-drug interactions. Anidulafungin is spontaneously degraded in the plasma. Caspofungin and micafungin undergo enzymatic metabolism in the liver, which is independent of CYP. Although several drug-drug interactions occur during caspofungin and micafungin treatment, echinocandins display a lower potential for drug-drug interactions. Flucytosine and azoles penetrate into most of relevant tissues. Amphotericin B accumulates in the liver and in the spleen. Its concentrations in lung and kidney are intermediate and relatively low myocardium and brain. Tissue distribution of echinocandins is similar to that of amphotericin. Combination antifungal therapy is established for cryptococcosis but controversial in other IFIs such as invasive aspergillosis and mucormycosis.
Topics: Antifungal Agents; Drug Interactions; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Mycoses; Tissue Distribution
PubMed: 28702763
DOI: 10.1007/s15010-017-1042-z -
Journal of Enzyme Inhibition and... Dec 2022With increasing number of immunocompromised patients as well as drug resistance in fungi, the risk of fatal fungal infections in humans increases as well. The action of... (Review)
Review
With increasing number of immunocompromised patients as well as drug resistance in fungi, the risk of fatal fungal infections in humans increases as well. The action of echinocandins is based on the inhibition of β-(1,3)-d-glucan synthesis that builds the fungal cell wall. Caspofungin, micafungin, anidulafungin and rezafungin are semi-synthetic cyclic lipopeptides. Their specific chemical structure possess a potential to obtain novel derivatives with better pharmacological properties resulting in more effective treatment, especially in infections caused by and species. In this review we summarise information about echinocandins with closer look on their chemical structure, mechanism of action, drug resistance and usage in clinical practice. We also introduce actual trends in modification of this antifungals as well as new methods of their administration, and additional use in viral and bacterial infections.
Topics: Antifungal Agents; Aspergillus; Candida; Cell Wall; Drug Design; Echinocandins; Glucans; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Molecular Structure
PubMed: 35296203
DOI: 10.1080/14756366.2022.2050224 -
Virulence Dec 2022Antifungal resistance to pathogens increases morbidity and mortality of immunosuppressive patients, an emerging crisis worldwide. Understanding the prevalence and... (Review)
Review
Antifungal resistance to pathogens increases morbidity and mortality of immunosuppressive patients, an emerging crisis worldwide. Understanding the prevalence and antifungal susceptibility pattern is necessary to control and treat candidiasis. We aimed to systematically analyse the susceptibility profiles of species published in the last ten years (December 2011 to December 2021) from mainland China. The studies were collected from PubMed, Google Scholar, and Science Direct search engines. Out of 89 included studies, a total of 44,716 isolates were collected, mainly comprising (49.36%), (21.89%), (13.92%), and (11.37%). The lowest susceptibility was detected for azole group; fluconazole susceptibilities against , and were 93.25%, 91.6%, 79.4%, 77.95%, 76%, 50%, and 0% respectively. Amphotericin B and anidulafungin were the most susceptible drugs for all species. Resistance to azole was mainly linked with mutations in , and genes. Mutation in and in and causing resistance to echinocandins was stated in two studies. Gaps in the studies' characteristics were detected, such as 79.77%, 47.19 %, 26.97%, 7.86%, and 4.49% studies did not mention the mortality rates, age, gender, breakpoint reference guidelines, and fungal identification method, respectively. The current study demonstrates the overall antifungal susceptibility pattern of species, gaps in surveillance studies and risk-reduction strategies that could be supportive in candidiasis therapy and for the researchers in their future studies.
Topics: Humans; Amphotericin B; Anidulafungin; Antifungal Agents; Azoles; Candida; Candida albicans; Candida glabrata; Candida parapsilosis; Candida tropicalis; Candidiasis; Echinocandins; Fluconazole; Microbial Sensitivity Tests
PubMed: 36120738
DOI: 10.1080/21505594.2022.2123325 -
Medicina Oral, Patologia Oral Y Cirugia... Mar 2019Candidiasis is one of the most common opportunistic oral infections that presents different acute and chronic clinical presentations with diverse diagnostic and... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Candidiasis is one of the most common opportunistic oral infections that presents different acute and chronic clinical presentations with diverse diagnostic and therapeutic approaches. The present study carries out a bibliographic review on the therapeutic tools available against oral candidiasis and their usefulness in each clinical situation.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Recent studies on treatment of oral candidiasis were retrieved from PubMed and Cochrane Library.
RESULTS
Nystatin and miconazole are the most commonly used topical antifungal drugs. Both antifungal drugs are very effective but need a long time of use to eradicate the infection. The pharmacological presentations of miconazole are more comfortable for patients but this drug may interact with other drugs and this fact should be assessed before use. Other topical alternatives for oral candidiasis, such as amphotericin B or clotrimazole, are not available in many countries. Oral fluconazole is effective in treating oral candidiasis that does not respond to topical treatment. Other systemic treatment alternatives, oral or intravenous, less used are itraconazole, voriconazole or posaconazole. Available novelties include echinocandins (anidulafungin, caspofungin) and isavuconazole. Echinocandins can only be used intravenously. Isavuconazole is available for oral and intravenous use. Other hopeful alternatives are new drugs, such as ibrexafungerp, or the use of antibodies, cytokines and antimicrobial peptides.
CONCLUSIONS
Nystatin, miconazole, and fluconazole are very effective for treating oral candidiasis. There are systemic alternatives for treating recalcitrant infections, such as the new triazoles, echinocandins, or lipidic presentations of amphotericin B.
Topics: Administration, Intravenous; Administration, Oral; Administration, Topical; Amphotericin B; Anidulafungin; Antifungal Agents; Azoles; Candidiasis, Oral; Caspofungin; Clotrimazole; Databases, Factual; Drug Interactions; Echinocandins; Fluconazole; Humans; Miconazole; Nitriles; Nystatin; Pyridines; Triazoles
PubMed: 30818309
DOI: 10.4317/medoral.22978 -
Haematologica Mar 2017The European Conference on Infections in Leukemia (ECIL) provides recommendations for diagnostic strategies and prophylactic, pre-emptive or targeted therapy strategies...
The European Conference on Infections in Leukemia (ECIL) provides recommendations for diagnostic strategies and prophylactic, pre-emptive or targeted therapy strategies for various types of infection in patients with hematologic malignancies or hematopoietic stem cell transplantation recipients. Meetings are held every two years since 2005 and evidence-based recommendations are elaborated after evaluation of the literature and discussion among specialists of nearly all European countries. In this manuscript, the ECIL group presents the 2015-update of the recommendations for the targeted treatment of invasive candidiasis, aspergillosis and mucormycosis. Current data now allow a very strong recommendation in favor of echinocandins for first-line therapy of candidemia irrespective of the underlying predisposing factors. Anidulafungin has been given the same grading as the other echinocandins for hemato-oncological patients. The beneficial role of catheter removal in candidemia is strengthened. guidelines now recommend the use of either voriconazole or isavuconazole for first-line treatment of invasive aspergillosis, while first-line combination antifungal therapy is not routinely recommended. As only few new data were published since the last ECIL guidelines, no major changes were made to mucormycosis recommendations.
Topics: Antifungal Agents; Aspergillosis; Candidiasis, Invasive; Clinical Trials as Topic; Combined Modality Therapy; Disease Management; Europe; Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation; Humans; Leukemia; Mucormycosis; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28011902
DOI: 10.3324/haematol.2016.152900 -
Clinical Microbiology and Infection :... Nov 2020EUCAST has revised the definition of the susceptibility category I from 'Intermediate' to 'Susceptible, Increased exposure'. This implies that I can be used where the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
EUCAST has revised the definition of the susceptibility category I from 'Intermediate' to 'Susceptible, Increased exposure'. This implies that I can be used where the drug concentration at the site of infection is high, either because of dose escalation or through other means to ensure efficacy. Consequently, I is no longer used as a buffer zone to prevent technical factors from causing misclassifications and discrepancies in interpretations. Instead, an Area of Technical Uncertainty (ATU) has been introduced for MICs that cannot be categorized without additional information as a warning to the laboratory that decision on how to act has to be made. To implement these changes, the EUCAST-AFST (Subcommittee on Antifungal Susceptibility Testing) reviewed all, and revised some, clinical antifungal breakpoints.
OBJECTIVES
The aim was to present an overview of the current antifungal breakpoints and supporting evidence behind the changes.
SOURCES
This document is based on the ten recently updated EUCAST rationale documents, clinical breakpoint and breakpoint ECOFF documents.
CONTENT
The following breakpoints (in mg/L) have been revised or established for Candida species: micafungin against C. albicans (ATU = 0.03); amphotericin B (S ≤/> R = 1/1), fluconazole (S ≤/> R = 2/4), itraconazole (S ≤/> R = 0.06/0.06), posaconazole (S ≤/> R = 0.06/0.06) and voriconazole (S ≤/> R = 0.06/0.25) against C. dubliniensis; fluconazole against C. glabrata (S ≤/> R = 0.001/16); and anidulafungin (S ≤/> R = 4/4) and micafungin (S ≤/> R = 2/2) against C. parapsilosis. For Aspergillus, new or revised breakpoints include itraconazole (ATU = 2) and isavuconazole against A. flavus (S ≤/> R = 1/2, ATU = 2); amphotericin B (S ≤/> R = 1/1), isavuconazole (S ≤ /> R = 1/2, ATU = 2), itraconazole (S ≤/> R = 1/1, ATU = 2), posaconazole (ATU = 0.25) and voriconazole (S ≤/> R = 1/1, ATU = 2) against A. fumigatus; itraconazole (S ≤/> R = 1/1, ATU = 2) and voriconazole (S ≤/> R = 1/1, ATU = 2) against A. nidulans; amphotericin B against A. niger (S ≤/> R = 1/1); and itraconazole (S ≤/> R = 1/1, ATU = 2) and posaconazole (ATU = 0.25) against A. terreus.
IMPLICATIONS
EUCAST-AFST has released ten new documents summarizing existing and new breakpoints and MIC ranges for control strains. A failure to adopt the breakpoint changes may lead to misclassifications and suboptimal or inappropriate therapy of patients with fungal infections.
Topics: Amphotericin B; Antifungal Agents; Aspergillus; Candida; Fluconazole; Itraconazole; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Triazoles; Voriconazole
PubMed: 32562861
DOI: 10.1016/j.cmi.2020.06.007 -
Clinical Microbiology and Infection :... Nov 2020The goal of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is to determine the appropriate exposure of difficult-to-manage medications to optimize the clinical outcomes in patients... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The goal of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is to determine the appropriate exposure of difficult-to-manage medications to optimize the clinical outcomes in patients in various clinical situations. Concerning antifungal treatment, and knowing that this procedure is expensive and time-consuming, TDM is particularly recommended for certain systemic antifungals: i.e., agents with a well-defined exposure-response relationship and unpredictable pharmacokinetic profile or narrow therapeutic index. Little evidence supports the routine use of TDM for polyenes (amphotericin B), echinocandins, fluconazole or new azoles such as isavuconazole, despite the fact that a better understanding of antifungal exposure may lead to a better response.
AIMS
The aim of this work is to review published pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic data on systemically administered antifungals, focusing on those for which monitoring is not routinely recommended by experts.
SOURCES
A MEDLINE search of the literature in English was performed introducing the following search terms: amphotericin B, fluconazole, itraconazole, voriconazole, posaconazole, triazoles, caspofungin, micafungin, anidulafungin, echinocandins, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and therapeutic drug monitoring. Review articles and guidelines were also screened.
CONTENT
This review collects different pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic aspects of systemic antifungals and summarizes recent threshold values for clinical outcomes and adverse events. Although for polyenes, echinocandins, fluconazole and isavuconazole extensive clinical validation is still required for a clear threshold and a routine monitoring recommendation, particular points such as liposome structure or complex pathophysiological conditions affecting final exposure are discussed. For the rest, their better-defined exposure-response/toxicity relationships allow access to useful threshold values and to justify routine monitoring. Additionally, clinical data are needed to better define thresholds that can minimize the development of antifungal resistance.
IMPLICATIONS
General TDM for all systemic antifungals is not recommended; however, this approach may help to establish an adequate antifungal exposure for a favourable response, prevention of toxicity or development of resistance in special clinical circumstances.
Topics: Antifungal Agents; Drug Monitoring; Echinocandins; Fluconazole; Humans; Mycoses; Nitriles; Polyenes; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Pyridines; Triazoles
PubMed: 32535150
DOI: 10.1016/j.cmi.2020.05.037