Comparison of fluconazole with oral polyenes in the prevention of fungal infections in neutropenic patients. A prospective, randomized, single-center study

Effectiveness of fluconazole as antifungal prophylaxis in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or immunotherapy: systematic review and meta-analysis

This review assessed the effectiveness of fluconazole as antifungal prophylaxis on the incidence of oral fungal diseases in patients undergoing cancer treatment. The secondary outcomes evaluated were the adverse effects, discontinuation of cancer therapy due to oral fungal infection, mortality by a fungal infection, and the mean duration of antifungal prophylaxis. Twelve databases and records were searched. The RoB 2 and ROBINS I tools were used to assess the risk of bias. The relative risk (RR), risk difference, and standard mean difference (SMD) were applied with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The certainty of the evidence was determined by GRADE. Twenty-four studies were included in this systematic review. In randomized controlled trials pooling, fluconazole was a protective factor for the primary outcome (RR = 0.30; CI: 0.16, 0.55; p < 0.01, vs placebo). Compared to other antifungals, fluconazole was only more effective than the subgroup of amphotericin B and nystatin (alone or in combination) (RR = 0.19; CI: 0.09, 0.43; p < 0.01). Fluconazole was also a protective factor in non-randomized trials pooling (RR = 0.19; CI: 0.05, 0.78; p = 0.02, vs untreated). The results showed no significant differences for the secondary outcomes. The certainty of the evidence was low and very low. In conclusion, prophylactic antifungals are necessary during cancer treatment, and fluconazole was shown to be more effective in reducing oral fungal diseases only compared with the subgroup assessing amphotericin B and nystatin, administered alone or in combination.

Comparison of Antifungal Prophylaxis Drugs in Patients With Hematological Disease or Undergoing Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

Several antifungal drugs are available for antifungal prophylaxis in patients with hematological disease or who are undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT).

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the evidence on the efficacy and adverse effects of antifungal agents using an integrated comparison.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials were searched to collect all relevant evidence published in randomized clinical trials that assessed antifungal prophylaxis in patients with hematological disease. Sources were search from inception up to October 2019.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies that compared any antifungal agent with a placebo, no antifungal agent, or another antifungal agent among patients with hematological disease or undergoing HSCT were included. Of 39 709 studies identified, 69 met the criteria for inclusion.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

The outcome from each study was estimated using the relative risk (RR) with 95% CIs. The Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model was used. The reliability and validity of the networks were estimated by addressing inconsistencies in the evidence from comparative studies of different treatments. Data were analyzed from December 2019 to February 2020. Reporting followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses for Network Meta-analysis (PRISMA-NMA) guideline.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcomes were invasive fungal infections (IFIs) and mortality. The secondary outcomes were fungal infections, proven IFIs, invasive candidiasis, invasive aspergillosis, fungi-related death, and withdrawal owing to adverse effects of the drug.

RESULTS

We identified 69 randomized clinical trials that reported comparisons of 12 treatments with at total of 14 789 patients. Posaconazole was the treatment associated with the best probability of success against IFIs (surface under the cumulative ranking curve, 86.7%; mean rank, 2.5). Posaconazole treatment was associated with a significant reduction in IFIs (RR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.42-0.79) and invasive aspergillosis (RR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.15-0.85) compared with placebo. Voriconazole was associated with a significant reduction in invasive candidiasis (RR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.09-0.26) compared with placebo. However, posaconazole was associated with a higher incidence of withdrawal because of the adverse effects of the drug (surface under the cumulative ranking curve, 17.5%; mean rank, 9.2). In subgroup analyses considering efficacy and tolerance, voriconazole might be the best choice for patients undergoing HSCT, especially allogenic HSCT; however, posaconazole was ranked as the best choice for patients with acute myeloid leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

These findings suggest that voriconazole may be the best prophylaxis option for patients undergoing HSCT, and posaconazole may be the best prophylaxis option for patients with acute myeloid leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome.

Antifungal agents in preventing oral candidiasis in clinical oncology: A network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This review examined the comparative efficacy and safety of antifungal agents in preventing oral candidiasis among patients on cancer treatment.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis based on randomised controlled trials that compared antifungal agents to placebo or other antifungal agents used in patients undergoing cancer treatment. Relative ranking of antifungal agents was evaluated with surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probability score. A total of 20 randomised controlled trials (3,215 participants) comparing 11 interventions were included.

RESULTS

Compared with placebo, clotrimazole was ranked the best agent for preventing the incidence of oral candidiasis (risk ratio (RR), 0.21 [95% CI 0.08 to 0.55]; SUCRA = 0.89). Fluconazole was ranked the safest among other antifungal agents (SUCRA = 0.80), whereas clotrimazole (SUCRA = 0.36) and amphotericin B (SUCRA = 0.18) were ranked low for safety. Amphotericin B was associated with highest risk of adverse events (RR, 3.52 [95% CI 1.27 to 9.75]).

CONCLUSION

Clotrimazole is the most effective in preventing oral candidiasis, whereas fluconazole has the most favourable risk-benefit profile in patients undergoing cancer treatment. However, we are unable to recommend clotrimazole as the best choice to prevent oral candidiasis due to unavailability of studies comparing clotrimazole with other antifungal agents.

Primary Fungal Prophylaxis in Hematological Malignancy: a Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Several new antifungal agents have become available for primary fungal prophylaxis of neutropenia fever in hematological malignancy patients. Our aim was to synthesize all evidence on efficacy and enable an integrated comparison of all current treatments. We performed a systematic literature review to identify all publicly available evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCT). We searched Embase, PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials, and the www.ClinicalTrials.gov website. In total, 54 RCTs were identified, including 13 treatment options. The evidence was synthesized using a network meta-analysis. Relative risk (RR) was adopted. Posaconazole was ranked highest in effectiveness for primary prophylaxis, being the most favorable in terms of (i) the RR for reduction of invasive fungal infection (0.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.11 to 0.36) and (ii) the probability of being the best option (94% of the cumulative ranking). Posaconazole also demonstrated its efficacy in preventing invasive aspergillosis and proven fungal infections, with RR of 0.13 (CI, 0.03 to 0.65) and 0.14 (CI, 0.05 to 0.38), respectively. However, there was no significant difference among all of the antifungal agents in all-cause mortality and overall adverse events. Our network meta-analysis provided an integrated overview of the relative efficacy of all available treatment options for primary fungal prophylaxis for neutropenic fever in hematological malignancy patients under myelosuppressive chemotherapy or hematopoietic cell transplantation. On the basis of this analysis, posaconazole seems to be the most effective prophylaxis option until additional data from head-to-head randomized controlled trials become available.

Weekly use of fluconazole as prophylaxis in haematological patients at risk for invasive candidiasis

Background

The goal was to determine whether one medical centres’ unique antifungal prophylactic regimen for patients at high risk for invasive candidiasis because of their haematological malignancies, haematopoietic stem cell transplants, or high-dose chemotherapy might lead ultimately to a higher incidence of infection, to increasing fluconazole resistance, or to a shift in the predominant strain of Candida in invasive fungal episodes.

Methods

Data were collected retrospectively, for a ten-year period from ONKO-KISS surveillance records, and from hospital, medical, and pharmacy records and then evaluated with respect to incidence of fungal infection episodes, emergence of antifungal drug resistance, and predominance of specific Candida strains in isolate cultures. Fisher’s exact test and linear regression were used to compare minimum inhibitory concentrations and to compare the incidence of different Candida isolates, respectively.

Results

The incidence of infection remained quite stable over 10 years with a median of 0.67 episodes/1000 bed days. Overall, Candida glabrata was the predominant species with 29% followed by C. albicans and C. krusei (14% each). No significant increment of non-albicans Candida species with decreased fluconazole susceptibility was perceived over this decade.

Conclusions

Once weekly administration of 400 mg of fluconazole to prevent candidaemia appears to have no negative impact on the efficacy as a prophylaxis when compared to standard of care (400 mg of fluconazole daily).

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12879-014-0573-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Nystatin prophylaxis and treatment in severely immunodepressed patients

BACKGROUND

Nystatin is sometimes used prophylactically in patients with severe immunodeficiency or in the treatment of fungal infection in such patients, although its effect seems to be equivocal.

OBJECTIVES

To study whether nystatin decreases morbidity and mortality when given prophylactically or therapeutically to patients with severe immunodeficiency.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched PubMed from 1966 to 7 July 2014 and the reference lists of identified articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised clinical trials comparing nystatin with placebo, an untreated control group, fluconazole or amphotericin B.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data on mortality, invasive fungal infection and colonisation were independently extracted by both authors. A random-effects model was used unless the P value was greater than 0.10 for the test of heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 14 trials (1569 patients). The drugs were given prophylactically in 12 trials and as treatment in two. Eleven trials were in acute leukaemia, solid cancer, or bone marrow recipients; one in liver transplant patients; one in critically ill surgical and trauma patients; and one in AIDS patients. Nystatin was compared with placebo in three trials, with fluconazole in 10, and amphotericin B in one; the dose varied from 0.8 MIE to 72 MIE daily and was 2 mg/kg/d in a liposomal formulation. The effect of nystatin was similar to that of placebo on fungal colonisation (relative risk (RR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65 to 1.13). There was no statistically significant difference between fluconazole and nystatin on mortality (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.03) whereas fluconazole was more effective in preventing invasive fungal infection (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.93) and colonisation (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.68). There were no proven fungal infections in a small trial that compared amphotericin B with liposomal nystatin. The results were very similar if the three studies that were not performed in cancer patients were excluded. For the 2011 and 2014 updates no additional trials were identified for inclusion.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Nystatin cannot be recommended for prophylaxis or the treatment of Candida infections in immunodepressed patients.

A systematic review of oral fungal infections in patients receiving cancer therapy

PURPOSE

The aims of this systematic review were to determine, in patients receiving cancer therapy, the prevalence of clinical oral fungal infection and fungal colonization, to determine the impact on quality of life and cost of care, and to review current management strategies for oral fungal infections.

METHODS

Thirty-nine articles that met the inclusion/exclusion criteria were independently reviewed by two calibrated reviewers, each using a standard form. Information was extracted on a number of variables, including study design, study population, sample size, interventions, blinding, outcome measures, methods, results, and conclusions for each article. Areas of discrepancy between the two reviews were resolved by consensus. Studies were weighted as to the quality of the study design, and recommendations were based on the relative strength of each paper. Statistical analyses were performed to determine the weighted prevalence of clinical oral fungal infection and fungal colonization.

RESULTS

For all cancer treatments, the weighted prevalence of clinical oral fungal infection was found to be 7.5% pre-treatment, 39.1% during treatment, and 32.6% after the end of cancer therapy. Head and neck radiotherapy and chemotherapy were each independently associated with a significantly increased risk for oral fungal infection. For all cancer treatments, the prevalence of oral colonization with fungal organisms was 48.2% before treatment, 72.2% during treatment, and 70.1% after treatment. The prophylactic use of fluconazole during cancer therapy resulted in a prevalence of clinical fungal infection of 1.9%. No information specific to oral fungal infections was found on quality of life or cost of care.

CONCLUSIONS

There is an increased risk of clinically significant oral fungal infection during cancer therapy. Systemic antifungals are effective in the prevention of clinical oral fungal infection in patients receiving cancer therapy. Currently available topical antifungal agents are less efficacious, suggesting a need for better topical agents.

Primary antifungal prophylaxis in adult hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients: current therapeutic concepts

In recipients of hematopoietic stem cell transplants (HSCTs), the mortality associated with invasive fungal infections (IFIs) remains high, despite the introduction of broad-spectrum antifungal agents over the past 2 decades. Preventing exposure to fungal pathogens in this population is impossible; therefore, clinicians have focused on prophylactic use of antifungal agents to prevent IFIs in high-risk HSCT recipients. It is important to target antifungal prophylaxis by type of HSCT (autologous or allogeneic), local epidemiology, and risk factors for IFIs so that patients can receive the most appropriate agent while balancing costs and the risks of toxicity, and minimizing the development of resistance. To assist clinicians in weighing the pros and cons of currently available antifungal agents when choosing a suitable prophylactic regimen, we provide a review of several key prospective randomized trials that evaluated various antifungal agents for primary prophylaxis in adult HSCT recipients. In addition, we describe the epidemiology of and risk factors for IFIs in HSCT recipients, the difficulties in diagnosing IFIs, antifungal agents used for prophylaxis, and the goals of primary prophylaxis. Fluconazole remains the gold standard for primary prophylaxis in autologous HSCT recipients. For allogeneic HSCT recipients, the agent chosen for prophylaxis must be based on the patient's risk factors for IFIs. In low-risk patients, fluconazole is an appropriate agent to use for primary prophylaxis immediately after transplantation. However, in allogeneic HSCT recipients who develop complications, such as graft failure, graft-versus-host disease, or cytomegalovirus infection, prophylaxis with a mould-active agent should be used.

Primary prophylaxis of invasive fungal infections in patients with hematologic malignancies. Recommendations of the Infectious Diseases Working Party of the German Society for Haematology and Oncology

There is no widely accepted standard for antifungal prophylaxis in patients with hematologic malignancies. The Infectious Diseases Working Party of the German Society for Haematology and Oncology assigned a committee of hematologists and infectious disease specialists to develop recommendations. Literature data bases were systematically searched for clinical trials on antifungal prophylaxis. The studies identified were shared within the committee. Data were extracted by two of the authors (OAC and MSi). The consensus process was conducted by email communication. Finally, a review committee discussed the proposed recommendations. After consensus was established the recommendations were finalized. A total of 86 trials were identified including 16,922 patients. Only a few trials yielded significant differences in efficacy. Fluconazole 400 mg/d improved the incidence rates of invasive fungal infections and attributable mortality in allogeneic stem cell recipients. Posaconazole 600 mg/d reduced the incidence of IFI and attributable mortality in allogeneic stem cell recipients with severe graft versus host disease, and in patients with acute myelogenous leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome additionally reduced overall mortality. Aerosolized liposomal amphotericin B reduced the incidence rate of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis. Posaconazole 600 mg/d is recommended in patients with acute myelogenous leukemia/myelodysplastic syndrome or undergoing allogeneic stem cell recipients with graft versus host disease for the prevention of invasive fungal infections and attributable mortality (Level A I). Fluconazole 400 mg/d is recommended in allogeneic stem cell recipients until development of graft versus host disease only (Level A I). Aerosolized liposomal amphotericin B is recommended during prolonged neutropenia (Level B II).

Management of fungal infections following allogeneic stem cell transplantation

Fungal infection remains an important complication in allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT). Since the prognosis of fungal infection is poor, prophylaxis is critical for its management; owing to recent progression in allo-SCT management and widespread use of reduced-intensity regimens, the strategy of infectious prophylaxis has also changed. Various antifungals have recently been developed and applied to clinical use. A major change in antifungal management will probably occur in the next few years.

Antifungal Prophylaxis in Cancer Patients After Chemotherapy or Hematopoietic Stem-Cell Transplantation: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Purpose

To evaluate the effect of antifungal prophylaxis on all-cause mortality as primary outcome, invasive fungal infections (IFIs), and adverse events. Many studies have evaluated the role of antifungal prophylaxis in cancer patients, with inconsistent conclusions.

Methods

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials comparing systemic antifungals with placebo, no intervention, or other antifungal agents for prophylaxis in cancer patients after chemotherapy. The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, conference proceedings, and references were searched. Two reviewers independently appraised the quality of trials and extracted data.

Results

Sixty-four trials met inclusion criteria. Antifungal prophylaxis decreased all-cause mortality significantly at end of follow-up compared with placebo, no treatment, or nonsystemic antifungals (relative risk [RR], 0.84; 95% CI, 0.74 to 0.95). In allogeneic hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT) recipients, prophylaxis reduced all-cause mortality (RR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.85), fungal-related mortality, and documented IFI. In acute leukemia patients, there was a significant reduction in fungal-related mortality and documented IFI, whereas the difference in mortality was only borderline significant (RR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.06). Prophylaxis with itraconazole suspension reduced documented IFI when compared with fluconazole, with no difference in survival, and at the cost of more adverse events. On the basis of two studies, posaconazole prophylaxis reduced all-cause mortality (RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.98), fungal-related mortality, and IFI when compared with fluconazole.

Conclusion

Antifungal prophylaxis decreases all-cause mortality significantly in patients after chemotherapy. Antifungal prophylaxis should be administered to patients undergoing allogeneic HSCT, and should probably be administered to high-risk acute leukemia patients.

Use of prophylactic antifungals in the immunocompromised host

Oral candidiasis is a significant infection in patients being treated with chemotherapy and radiotherapy for cancer, and in patients who are immunocompromised because of HIV infection and AIDS. Candida albicans is the most common fungal pathogen and has developed an extensive array of putative virulent mechanisms that allows successful colonization and infection of the host under suitable predisposing conditions. The purpose of this review of the literature was to assess the effectiveness of interventions for the prevention of oral candidiasis in immunocompromised patients and in patients treated for cancer with radiotherapy and/or chemotherapy. These patient categories were selected because they have been the topic of published randomized controlled clinical trials. The studies reviewed provide strong evidence that oral candidiasis is associated with greater morbidity and mortality in these populations, which substantiates the aggressive treatment and prophylaxis of this infection. The literature supports the recommendation that systemically applied antifungal drugs have the greatest efficacy for the treatment of oral candidiasis in cancer and immunocompromised patients; however, these therapies must be prescribed with a thorough assessment for the risk for developing drug-induced toxicities. Guidelines on the prevention of drug-resistant oral candidiasis in these patients are not available and require elucidation. Further studies are required to expand the knowledge base of evidence-based antifungal therapies in a wider variety of immunocompromised patients and conditions, such as Sjögren's syndrome, diabetes, and denture wearers. Additional exploration is needed to determine which antifungal drug formulation, dose, and method of delivery is preferable for the type of fungal infection and the underlying etiology.

Interventions for preventing oral candidiasis for patients with cancer receiving treatment

BACKGROUND

Treatment of cancer is increasingly more effective but is associated with short and long term side effects. Oral side effects remain a major source of illness despite the use of a variety of agents to prevent and treat them. One of these side effects is oral candidiasis.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions (which may include placebo or no treatment) for the prevention of oral candidiasis for patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy or radiotherapy or both.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Computerised searches of Cochrane Oral Health Group and PAPAS Trials Registers, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CANCERLIT, SIGLE and LILACS were undertaken. Reference lists from relevant articles were searched and the authors of eligible trials were contacted to identify trials and obtain additional information. Date of the most recent searches: June 2006: CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2006, Issue 2).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Trials were selected if they met the following criteria: design - random allocation of participants; participants - anyone receiving chemotherapy or radiotherapy treatment for cancer; interventions - agents prescribed to prevent oral candidiasis; primary outcome - prevention of oral candidiasis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were recorded on the following secondary outcomes if present: relief of pain, amount of analgesia, relief of dysphagia, incidence of systemic infection, duration of stay in hospital (days), cost of oral care, patient quality of life, death, use of empirical antifungal treatment, toxicity and compliance. Information regarding methods, participants, interventions, outcome measures and results were independently extracted, in duplicate, by two review authors. The Cochrane Oral Health Group statistical guidelines were followed and risk ratios (RR) calculated using random-effects models. Potential sources of heterogeneity were examined in random-effects metaregression analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-eight trials involving 4226 patients satisfied the inclusion criteria. Drugs absorbed and partially absorbed from the gastrointestinal (GI) tract were found to prevent oral candidiasis when compared to a placebo, or a no treatment control group, with RR for absorbed drugs = 0.47 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29 to 0.78). For absorbed drugs in populations with an incidence of 20% (mid range of results in control groups), this implies a NNT of 9 (95% CI 7 to 13) patients need to be treated to avoid one patient getting oral candidiasis. There was no significant benefit shown for drugs not absorbed from the GI tract.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is strong evidence, from randomised controlled trials, that drugs absorbed or partially absorbed from the GI tract prevent oral candidiasis in patients receiving treatment for cancer. There is also evidence that these drugs are significantly better at preventing oral candidiasis than drugs not absorbed from the GI.

Fungal infection-related mortality versus total mortality as an outcome in trials of antifungal agents

BACKGROUND

Disease specific mortality is often used as outcome rather than total mortality in clinical trials. This approach assumes that the classification of cause of death is unbiased. We explored whether use of fungal infection-related mortality as outcome rather than total mortality leads to bias in trials of antifungal agents in cancer patients.

METHODS

As an estimate of bias we used relative risk of death in those patients the authors considered had not died from fungal infection. Our sample consisted of 69 trials included in four systematic reviews of prophylactic or empirical antifungal treatment in patients with cancer and neutropenia we have published previously.

RESULTS

Thirty trials met the inclusion criteria. The trials comprised 6130 patients and 869 deaths, 220 (25%) of which were ascribed to fungal infection. The relative risk of death was 0.85 (95% CI 0.75-0.96) for total mortality, 0.57 (95% CI 0.44-0.74) for fungal mortality, and 0.95 (95% CI 0.82-1.09) for mortality among those who did not die from fungal infection.

CONCLUSION

We could not support the hypothesis that use of disease specific mortality introduces bias in antifungal trials on cancer patients as our estimate of the relative risk for mortality in those who survived the fungal infection was not increased. We conclude that it seems to be reliable to use fungal mortality as the primary outcome in trials of antifungal agents. Data on total mortality should be reported as well, however, to guard against the possible introduction of harmful treatments.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of antifungal treatment for patients on chemotherapy

Invasive fungal infections are fatal complications for patients on chemotherapy, and antifungal prophylactic treatment has been commonly recommended. Because its clinical and economic impact is not well known, we evaluated cost-effectiveness of anti-fungal treatment for patients who were neutropoenic as a result of chemotherapy. We constructed a hypothetical cohort of 40-year-old patients with acute myelogenic leukemia to evaluate years of life survived (YLS), costs (US$), and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (US$/YLS). The following treatment strategies for fungal infections were compared: (1) prophylactic fluconazole strategy: oral fluconazole administration concurrently with chemotherapy; (2) empirical amphotericin B strategy: empirical intravenous amphotericin B administration at the point where fever is detected; and (3) no prophylaxis strategy: intravenous micafangin administration at the point where fungal infections is diagnosed. Baseline analyses showed that prophylactic fluconazole strategy involved higher costs but also longer YLSs (25,900 US$ and 24.08 YLS). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of prophylactic fluconazole strategy was 625 US$/YLS compared to no prophylaxis strategy, and 652 US$/YLS compared to empirical amphotericin B strategy. Baseline result was found to be robust through sensitivity analyses. Our study showed that concurrent administration of oral fluconazole during induction chemotherapy appears to ensure clinical benefits together with acceptable cost-effectiveness.

Fluconazole for the management of invasive candidiasis: where do we stand after 15 years?

Candida spp. are responsible for most of the fungal infections in humans. Available since 1990, fluconazole is well established as a leading drug in the setting of prevention and treatment of mucosal and invasive candidiasis. Fluconazole displays predictable pharmacokinetics and an excellent tolerance profile in all groups, including the elderly and children. Fluconazole is a fungistatic drug against yeasts and lacks activity against moulds. Candida krusei is intrinsically resistant to fluconazole, and other species, notably Candida glabrata, often manifest reduced susceptibility. Emergence of azole-resistant strains as well as discovery of new antifungal drugs (new triazoles and echinocandins) have raised important questions about its use as a first line drug. The aim of this review is to summarize the main available data on the position of fluconazole in the prophylaxis or curative treatment of invasive Candida spp. infections. Fluconazole is still a major drug for antifungal prophylaxis in the setting of transplantation (solid organ and bone marrow), intensive care unit, and in neutropenic patients. Prophylactic fluconazole still has a place in HIV-positive patients in viro-immunological failure with recurrent mucosal candidiasis. Fluconazole can be used in adult neutropenic patients with systemic candidiasis, as long as the species identified is a priori susceptible. Among non-neutropenic patients with candidaemia fluconazole is one of the first line drugs for susceptible species. Cases reports and uncontrolled studies have also reported its efficacy in the setting of osteoarthritis, endophthalmitis, meningitis, endocarditis and peritonitis caused by Candida spp. among immunocompetent adults. In paediatrics, fluconazole is a well tolerated and major prophylactic drug for high-risk neonates, as well as an alternative treatment for neonatal candidiasis. Importantly 15 years after its introduction in the antifungal armamentarium, fluconazole is still a first line treatment option in several cases of invasive candidiasis. Its prophylactic use should however be limited to selected high-risk patients to limit the risk of emergence of azole-resistant strains.

Interventions for preventing oral candidiasis for patients with cancer receiving treatment

BACKGROUND

Treatment of cancer is increasingly more effective but is associated with short and long term side effects. Oral side effects remain a major source of illness despite the use of a variety of agents to prevent and treat them. One of these side effects is oral candidiasis.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of interventions (which may include placebo or no treatment) for the prevention of oral candidiasis for patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Electronic databases: Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, MEDLINE Pre-indexed, EMBASE, CINAHL, CANCERLIT, SIGLE and LILACS were searched. Date of the most recent searches April 2004 (CENTRAL Issue 2, 2004).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Trials were selected if they met the following criteria: design - random allocation of participants; participants - anyone receiving chemotherapy or radiotherapy treatment for cancer; interventions - agents prescribed to prevent oral candidiasis; primary outcome - prevention of oral candidiasis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were recorded on the following secondary outcomes if present: relief of pain, amount of analgesia, relief of dysphagia, incidence of systemic infection, duration of stay in hospital (days), cost of oral care, patient quality of life, death, use of empirical antifungal treatment, toxicity and compliance. Information regarding methods, participants, interventions, outcome measures and results were independently extracted, in duplicate, by two reviewers (HW & JC). The Cochrane Oral Health Group statistical guidelines were followed and relative risk values calculated using random effects models. Potential sources of heterogeneity were examined in random effects metaregression analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-eight trials involving 4226 patients satisfied the inclusion criteria. Drugs absorbed and partially absorbed from the gastrointestinal (GI) tract were found to prevent oral candidiasis when compared to a placebo, or a no treatment control group, with RR for absorbed drugs = 0.47 (95% CI 0.29 to 0.78). For absorbed drugs in populations with an incidence of 20% (mid range of results in control groups), this implies a NNT of 9 (95% CI 7 to 13) patients need to be treated to avoid one patient getting oral candidiasis. There was no significant benefit shown for drugs not absorbed from the GI tract.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

There is strong evidence, from randomised controlled trials, that drugs absorbed or partially absorbed from the GI tract prevent oral candidiasis in patients receiving treatment for cancer. There is also evidence that these drugs are significantly better at preventing oral candidiasis than drugs not absorbed from the GI.

Evidence-based assessment of primary antifungal prophylaxis in patients with hematologic malignancies

Invasive fungal infection is an increasing source of morbidity and mortality in patients with hematologic malignancies, particularly those with prolonged and severe neutropenia (absolute white blood cell count < 100/microL). Early diagnosis of invasive fungal infection is difficult, suggesting that antifungal prophylaxis could be the best approach for neutropenic patients undergoing intensive myelosuppressive chemotherapy. Consequently, antifungal prophylaxis has been extensively studied for more than 20 years. Nonabsorbable polyenes reduce superficial mycoses but are not effective in preventing or treating invasive fungal infections. Intravenous amphotericin B and the newer azoles were used in numerous clinical trials, but the value of antifungal prophylaxis in defined risk groups with cancer is still open to discussion. Recipients of allogeneic stem cell transplants and patients with a relapsed leukemia are high-risk patient populations. In addition, certain risk factors are well defined, for example, neutropenia more than 10 days, corticosteroid therapy, sustained immunosuppression, and graft-versus-host disease. In contrast to study efforts, evidence-based recommendations on the clinical use of antifungal prophylaxis according to risk groups are rare. The objective of this review of 50 studies accumulating more than 9000 patients is to assess evidence-based criteria with regard to the efficacy of antifungal prophylaxis in neutropenic cancer patients.

Antifungal prophylaxis for severely neutropenic chemotherapy recipients: a meta analysis of randomized-controlled clinical trials

BACKGROUND

The overall clinical efficacy of the azoles antifungal agents and low-dose intravenous amphotericin B for antifungal chemoprophylaxis in patients with malignant disease who have severe neutropenia remains unclear.

METHODS

Randomized-controlled trials of azoles (fluconazole, itraconazole, ketoconazole, and miconazole) or intravenous amphotericin B formulations compared with placebo/no treatment or polyene-based controls in severely neutropenic chemotherapy recipients were evaluated using meta-analytical techniques.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight trials that included 7014 patients (study agents, 3515 patients; control patients, 3499 patients) were analyzed. Overall, there were reductions in the use of parenteral antifungal therapy (prophylaxis success: odds ratio [OR], 0.57; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.48-0.68; relative risk reduction [RRR], 19%; number requiring treatment for this outcome [NNT], 10 patients), superficial fungal infection (OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.20-0.43; RRR, 61%; NNT, 12 patients), invasive fungal infection (OR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.35-0.55; RRR, 56%; NNT, 22 patients), and fungal infection-related mortality (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.41-0.82; RRR, 47%; NNT, 52 patients). Invasive aspergillosis was unaffected (OR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.62-1.44). Although overall mortality was not reduced (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.74-1.03), subgroup analyses showed reduced mortality in studies of patients who had prolonged neutropenia (OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.55-0.95) or who underwent hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.59-0.99). The multivariate metaregression analyses identified HSCT, prolonged neutropenia, acute leukemia with prolonged neutropenia, and higher azole dose as predictors of treatment effect.

CONCLUSIONS

Antifungal prophylaxis reduced morbidity, as evidenced by reductions in the use of parenteral antifungal therapy, superficial fungal infection, and invasive fungal infection, as well as reducing fungal infection-related mortality. These effects were most pronounced in patients with malignant disease who had prolonged neutropenia and HSCT recipients.

Nystatin prophylaxis and treatment in severely immunodepressed patients

BACKGROUND

Nystatin is sometimes used prophylactically in patients with severe immunodeficiency or in the treatment of fungal infection in such patients, although the effect seems to be equivocal.

OBJECTIVES

To study whether nystatin decreases morbidity and mortality when given prophylactically or therapeutically to patients with severe immunodeficiency.

SEARCH STRATEGY

MEDLINE and The Cochrane Library using a comprehensive search strategy, date of last search November 2001. Contacted industry and scanned reference lists.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised trials comparing nystatin with placebo, an untreated control group, fluconazole or amphotericin B.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data on mortality, invasive fungal infection and colonisation were extracted by both authors independently. The outcomes were weighted by the inverse variance. A random effects model was used unless p>0.10 for the test of heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 12 trials (1,464 patients). The drugs were given prophylactically in ten trials and as treatment in two. Seven trials were in acute leukaemia, two in cancer, one in liver transplant patients, one in critically ill surgical and trauma patients, and one in AIDS patients. Nystatin had been compared with placebo in three trials and with fluconazole in nine; the dose varied from 1.5 MIE to 72 MIE daily. The effect of nystatin was similar to that of placebo on fungal colonisation (relative risk 0.85, 95% confidence interval 0.65 to 1.13). There was no statistically significant difference between fluconazole and nystatin on mortality (relative risk 0.76, 0.49 to 1.18) whereas fluconazole was more effective in preventing invasive fungal infection (relative risk 0.37, 0.15 to 0.91) and colonisation (relative risk 0.49, 0.34 to 0.70). The results were very similar if the three studies which were not performed in cancer patients were excluded.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Nystatin cannot be recommended for prophylaxis or treatment of Candida infections in immunodepressed patients.

A randomized controlled trial of itraconazole versus fluconazole for the prevention of fungal infections in patients with haematological malignancies. U.K. Multicentre Antifungal Prophylaxis Study Group

Fluconazole is widely used as antifungal prophylaxis but it is ineffective against Aspergillus. Itraconazole has a broader spectrum of activity but the capsules give erratic bioavailability in neutropenic patients. We compared itraconazole oral solution (which has an improved pharmacokinetic profile) with fluconazole for antifungal prophylaxis. Adults with haematological malignancies receiving chemotherapy or bone marrow transplants were randomly allocated 5 mg/kg/d itraconazole (itra) solution (288 episodes) or 100 mg fluconazole suspension (flu) (293 episodes) from before the onset of neutropenia until neutrophil recovery or suspected fungal infection. Outcomes were assessed by independent reviewers unaware of the prophylaxis allocation. More proven systemic fungal infections occurred in flu (Aspergillus four, Candida tropicalis one, C. krusei one) than itra (C. albicans one) and more of these were fatal (four versus nil). This difference reached statistical significance when first study episodes were considered separately (six flu versus nil itra, P = 0.03). Significantly more deaths of presumed fungal origin occurred in flu than itra (seven versus nil, P = 0.024). There were significantly more cases of proven aspergillosis in flu than itra (six versus nil, P = 0.038, 5/6 cases were fatal) if those occurring outside the study period are included. Significantly more patients receiving flu required amphotericin B (58 v 39, P = 0.043) but this may have been affected by the fact that the study was not blinded. There were 11 proven mucosal candidal infections in flu and four in itra. Itraconazole solution and fluconazole provide effective prophylaxis against Candida but itraconazole affords greater protection against fatal aspergillosis.

Accumulation of fluconazole in scalp hair

The accumulation in scalp hair of the antimycotic triazole, fluconazole, was studied during and after administration. Fluconazole 50 mg was administered to 12 healthy subjects as a single capsule each day for 28 days. The concentration of fluconazole 5 hours after administration was measured in different 1-cm sections of scalp hair at intervals during treatment and for 6 months after the end of treatment. In each section of scalp hair the concentration of fluconazole increased during treatment and was consistently higher than values found in plasma. For example, the mean concentration in the first hair section on day 28, 19.8 micrograms/g, corresponded to a mean penetration ratio relative to plasma of 9.42. During administration, the maximal concentration of fluconazole was found in the first hair section. After cessation of administration, the measured concentrations of fluconazole decreased and greater concentrations were found in the distal hair sections, presumably as a result of hair growth. Fluconazole was detectable, however, in the hair of 9 of the 12 subjects even 6 months after treatment. The mean concentration of fluconazole in hair bulbs on day 28 was 12.1 micrograms/g (n = 6), corresponding to a mean penetration ratio of 5.99. In a second study, fluconazole was administered as a single oral 150-mg capsule per week for 4 weeks to a group of 8 healthy subjects. The mean fluconazole concentration in whole scalp hair 5 hours after the last dose was 3.2 micrograms/g.

Oropharyngeal candidiasis: a review of its clinical spectrum and current therapies

With the increased use of antibiotics and immunosuppressive agents, oropharyngeal candidiasis is becoming more common. This infection is also associated with such advances in medical management as chemotherapy and organ transplantation and with human immunodeficiency virus infection. Various topical and systemic agents are available to treat patients with candidiasis, but optimal management can be elusive. Treatment of uncomplicated oropharyngeal candidiasis in the immunocompetent patient involves selecting a particular formulation of a topical medication based on oral conditions, length of contact time, and taste, texture, and cost of the medication. Treatment of severe oropharyngeal candidiasis, particularly in patients with a compromised immune system, is often more difficult, and relapses are common. Reports of resistance to systemic agents, particularly in patients needing recurrent therapy, are increasing. Amphotericin B, long used as an intravenous agent, is now available as an oral suspension that may offer therapeutic benefits comparable to those of systemic therapy without the toxicity associated with systemic absorption.

Clinical pharmacokinetics of fluconazole in superficial and systemic mycoses

The bis triazole agent fluconazole is used widely in the treatment of superficial and deep mycoses. A single oral dose of fluconazole 150 mg gives a mean long term clinical cure rate of 84 +/- 5% and is considered a valuable alternative to other topical antifungal drugs for vaginal candidiasis. A clinical cure rate of 90.4% for oropharyngeal candidiasis was obtained with 100mg daily for a minimum of 14 days; however, as for the other azoles the rate of relapse was large (40%) in immunocompromised patients. A daily dose of 100mg for at last 3 weeks gave satisfying outcomes for oesophageal candidiasis. Most patients (71 to 86%) with signs and symptoms of urinary tract candidiasis show beneficial clinical results when given oral fluconazole 50mg for several weeks. Fluconazole 50 to 150 mg given for weeks or months results in over 90% clinical cure or improvement for cutaneous mycosis including tinea, pityriasis, cryptococcosis and candidiasis. Prolonged (6 to 12 months) fluconazole 150 mg once a week is needed to treat onychomycosis successfully. Higher oral doses (200 to 400 mg daily) for long periods are generally used to treat deep mycoses such as meningitis, ophthalmitis, pneumonia, hepatosplenic mycosis and endocarditis. Fluconazole is effective for treating the fungal peritonitis which can complicate continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD). A regimen of 50 mg intraperitoneally or 100 mg orally was used in these patients with impaired renal function. The dosage schedules used to treat disseminated fungal infections due to systemic mycoses with different or multiple foci of infections vary widely, with doses of 50 to 400 mg given orally or intravenously for between 1 week and several months. The most recent clinical reports have investigated the use of prophylaxis with fluconazole 100 to 400 mg daily, in immunocompromised patients. Fluconazole is found in body fluids such as vaginal secretions, breast milk, saliva, sputum and cerebrospinal fluid at concentrations comparable with those determined in blood after single or multiple doses. There is an excellent linear plasma concentration-dose relationship, but the mycological and clinical responses do not appear to be well correlated with the dose. A total maximum daily dose of 1600 mg is recommended to avoid neurological toxicity. Data from pharmacokinetic studies conducted in patients, mainly those with AIDS, and using a 1-compartment model give very constant parameters similar to those obtained in healthy individuals. Bioavailability, measured in HIV-positive patients and those with AIDS, exceeded 93% for tablets, suspension and suppositories. The time to reach peak plasma concentrations (tmax) was 2.4 to 3.7 hours. The peak plasma drug concentration (Cmax) obtained after a 100 mg oral dose was 2 mg/L. Areas under the concentration-time curve (AUC) obtained in different studies all correlate well with the dose (r = 0.926). The AUC determined after 200 and 25 mg suppositories were similarly well correlated. Hypochlorhydria does not affect the absorption of fluconazole, neither does food intake, race (Japanese or Caucasian) or gastrointestinal resection. Binding to plasma protein is low (11.14%) and is increased to 23% in cancer patients. Fluconazole is rapidly distributed to the tissue, where it accumulates. Tissues fall into 1 of 4 groups of increasing drug concentration: blood, bone and brain have the lowest concentrations, and spleen has the highest. The volume of distribution (Vd) remains stable at 46.3 +/- 7.9L and is considered to be an 'invariant' parameter across species. Fluconazole is poorly metabolised and is mainly eliminated unchanged in the urine. The percentage of the dose recovered in the urine in 48 hours is close to 60%. Concentrations in the urine are high and the half-life (t1/2) is long (37.2 +/- 5.5h) in patients, mainly those with AIDS, which is not significantly different from the t1/2 (31.4 +/- 4.7 hours) in healthy individuals. (ABSTRACT TRUN

Antifungal prophylaxis during neutropenia and immunodeficiency

Fungal infections represent a major source of morbidity and mortality in patients with almost all types of immunodeficiencies. These infections may be nosocomial (aspergillosis) or community acquired (cryptococcosis), or both (candidiasis). Endemic mycoses such as histoplasmosis, coccidioidomycosis, and penicilliosis may infect many immunocompromised hosts in some geographic areas and thereby create major public health problems. With the wide availability of oral azoles, antifungal prophylactic strategies have been extensively developed. However, only a few well-designed studies involving strict criteria have been performed, mostly in patients with hematological malignancies or AIDS. In these situations, the best dose and duration of administration of the antifungal drug often remain to be determined. In high-risk neutropenic or bone marrow transplant patients, fluconazole is effective for the prevention of superficial and/or systemic candidal infections but is not always able to prolong overall survival and potentially selects less susceptible or resistant Candida spp. Primary prophylaxis against aspergillosis remains investigative. At present, no standard general recommendation for primary antifungal prophylaxis can be proposed for AIDS patients or transplant recipients. However, for persistently immunocompromised patients who previously experienced a noncandidal systemic fungal infection, prolonged suppressive antifungal therapy is often indicated to prevent a relapse. Better strategies for controlling immune deficiencies should also help to avoid some potentially life-threatening deep mycoses. When prescribing antifungal prophylaxis, physicians should be aware of the potential emergence of resistant strains, drug-drug interactions, and the cost. Well-designed, randomized, multicenter clinical trials in high-risk immunocompromised hosts are urgently needed to better define how to prevent severe invasive mycoses.

Systemic candidiasis in cardiac surgery patients

OBJECTIVE

To examine the frequency, predisposing factors and consequences of systemic candidiasis in cardiac surgery patients. We also examined fluconazole efficacy in the treatment of disseminated fungal disease.

METHODS

A total of 2615 adult patients of mean +/- S.D. age 60.8 +/- 8.7 years who underwent open heart surgery between July 1993 and April 1995, were enrolled in the initial protocol. Patients were divided in two groups according to length of stay in the intensive care unit (ICU). The cut-off was a length of stay of 9 days.

RESULTS

In the group of patients with prolonged stay (n = 54), 11 patients (20.3%) developed systemic candidiasis, usually after the twentieth postoperative day. Predisposing factors were patient age, history of diabetes mellitus, presence of central venous catheters, prolonged mechanical ventilatory support, prolonged ICU stay, and administration of antibiotics and of total parenteral nutrition for a prolonged period. The patients who developed systemic candidiasis had a median ICU and hospital stay of 58 and 60 days respectively. The mortality rate was 27.2%. Patients receiving fluconazole, improved and eventually negative cultures were obtained.

CONCLUSIONS

We concluded that a significant percentage of patients who remained in the cardiothoracic ICU for more than 9 days developed systemic candidiasis. Systemic candidiasis resulted in a significant prolongation of ICU and hospital length of stay, thus increasing extensively total hospitalization costs. Fluconazole seems to be an effective and well-tolerated agent in the treatment of severe life-threatening systemic candidiasis, and a very good alternative to amphotericin B, in cardiac surgery patients.

Prevention and therapy of fungal infections in cancer patients. A review of recently published information

This review of recent publications in the field of fungal infections in cancer patients clearly confirms that protracted severe granulocytopenia is a major risk factor for their development. Because severe and prolonged granulocytopenia plays such a major predisposing role for fungal infections, it is likely that the use of the colony-stimulating factors, which are able to reduce the duration and the severity of granulocytopenia, might prove effective in decreasing the frequency and the severity of these infections. Another conclusion is that certain categories of patients with granulocytopenia might benefit from antifungal prophylaxis and empiric therapy. Conversely, there are other populations who will benefit only marginally from such strategies. Imidazoles, namely fluconazole, for the prevention of local and systemic Candida infections have been shown to be effective in granulocytopenic patients. So far, the development of resistance has not been a major problem. In patients at the greatest risk of developing severe fungal infections, such as those receiving high-dose corticosteroid therapy for GVHD after allogeneic bone marrow transplantation, early administration of low doses of amphotericin B seems to be effective in reducing the development of systemic fungal infection. In terms of therapy, amphotericin B is still the standard approach, especially for empiric treatment, prior to the recognition of a specific pathogen.